Conciseness

The body is dense, purely directive prose with zero padding or concept explanation (e.g., "Never point a reviewer at your own working tree"), but the tiny-work rule is restated across the Contract, §1, §2, §3, and §6, which could be trimmed. This fits the level-4 anchor (efficient with minor trimmable instances) rather than level-5 (every token earns its place) or level-3 (noticeably unnecessary explanation).

Actionability

Guidance is fully executable for an instruction-only skill: a copy-paste reviewer-launch prompt in §3, the exact watcher command `timeout 1800 gh pr checks <n> --required --watch --fail-fast`, explicit gates ("Do not start review without `VALIDATION: GREEN`"), and named disposition states (DECLINED, TRACKED FOLLOW-UP, NOT A FINDING). Specific templates cover the common cases, matching the level-5 anchor.

Workflow Clarity

Six numbered phases (§1–§6) are clearly sequenced with explicit validation checkpoints at every boundary ("Do not start review without VALIDATION: GREEN", "Only after review and CI are green, return ...") and explicit feedback loops: correction batches re-enter `$prp-implement` in review-correction mode, blocking fixes trigger `$prp-review --verify-corrections`, and CI failures route through CI-correction mode then re-verification. This matches the level-5 anchor.

Progressive Disclosure

The skill is a single self-contained ~75-line file with no bundle directories (references/, scripts/, assets/ do not exist), no nested references, and numbered sections that make navigation trivial. Nothing here warrants splitting into separate files, so the well-organized single-file structure earns the top score rather than the level-4 anchor with organization gaps.

Specificity

The description enumerates concrete lifecycle actions ("through planning, implementation, pull request, independent review, corrections, and green CI") and concrete input types ("issue, PRD, document, existing plan, or free-form request"), all in third-person voice ("Autonomously owns"). Coverage of the delivery lifecycle is comprehensive, matching the level-5 anchor rather than the level-4 anchor with minor gaps.

Completeness

Both halves are explicit: a concrete what ("owns one workstream ... through planning, implementation, pull request, independent review, corrections, and green CI") and an explicit "Always use when" clause with multiple concrete trigger phrases. This matches the level-5 anchor; the level-4 anchor's weaker or less specific when-clause does not apply.

Trigger Term Quality

It includes natural user phrasings like "implement or ship work end to end", "take an issue or idea to a reviewed PR", and "run plan to PR", plus self-referential triggers ("invokes $prp-issue", "prp-orchestrate"). It falls short of the level-5 anchor because common synonyms such as "deliver", "finish this ticket", or "get this PR-ready" are absent.

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

Qualifiers like "end to end", "reviewed PR", "$prp-issue", and "prp-orchestrate needs an end-to-end delivery engine" carve a clear niche against sibling prp-* skills, but the broad opening "when the user asks to implement ... work" carries minor overlap risk with a plain implementation skill, fitting the level-4 rather than level-5 anchor.