Conciseness

The body is dense and almost every line carries load (contracts, gates, return-value requirements) with no padding of concepts Claude already knows; a few ownership-contract points are restated across stages and could be trimmed, fitting efficient with minor over-explanation.

Actionability

Each stage provides copy-paste-ready blockquote agent prompts with explicit placeholders and required return values (e.g., "Return VALIDATION: GREEN, the resolved absolute plan path..."), giving fully executable guidance across the common cases.

Workflow Clarity

A clear numbered sequence (Resolve/plan through Return the outcome) with explicit validation checkpoints (VALIDATION: GREEN, READY TO MERGE, green required CI) and correction feedback loops (NEEDS FIXES -> correction -> fresh re-review) matches the anchor for clear sequence with explicit validation and error-recovery loops.

Progressive Disclosure

The skill is well-organized into an ownership contract plus six labeled stages with no nested references, but it is a single monolithic file with no bundle files to progressively disclose, leaving minor organization room versus the ideal split overview.

Specificity

The description states only "This is an experimental skill" with no concrete actions or domain named; it describes nothing the skill actually does, matching the anchor for entirely vague, pure abstract language.

Completeness

Only a 'when' is present ("Never use it unless the user explicitly tells you to invoke /prp-deliver") with no 'what' describing capabilities, matching the anchor where only 'when' is present without 'what'.

Trigger Term Quality

The only keyword is the command name "/prp-deliver" referenced via "explicitly tells you to invoke"; it has one trigger token but misses the natural task phrases a user would say, fitting one-or-two generic keywords.

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

The trigger is restricted to an explicit user invocation of "/prp-deliver", giving it a clear niche with minimal conflict risk against other skills.