The body is dense and operational — exact commands, an entry-field spec, a type table, naming rules, and write principles — with no padding explaining concepts Claude already knows. The brief intro ('记录家庭档案的目的不是"存档"…') and the passive-scenario handling earn their tokens rather than restating known ideas.

It gives copy-paste-ready commands (`miloco-cli home-profile list/profile-write/commit`) plus a full bash example with a concrete JSON ops array, and maps each op (add/merge/replace/delete) to its trigger condition. Not score 2 because the guidance is complete and executable rather than pseudocode or abstract.

The four-step sequence (pull full profile → judge intent → write → commit) is clear and the mandatory pre-write pull is a strong safeguard, but there is no post-write verification or validate→fix→retry loop. Because the workflow covers destructive ops (delete/replace), the rubric's cap-at-2 rule for missing feedback loops applies; not score 3 because validation checkpoints are implicit rather than explicit.

Sections are well-organized with clear headers and a taxonomy table, but the skill is a single ~104-line monolithic file with no external references, and detailed reference material (type taxonomy, subject naming rules, pet/composition edge cases) is inline rather than split out. Not score 1 because it is well-structured rather than a wall of text; not score 3 because it is over 50 lines and uses no one-level-deep reference files.

It lists multiple concrete actions on the family-profile object — 记录 (record), 修正 (correct), 删除 (delete), 查询 (query) — alongside the domain label 家庭档案管理, matching the 'lists multiple specific concrete actions' anchor. Not score 2 because the action set is comprehensive (full CRUD) rather than partial.

It states what the skill does (家庭档案管理) and gives explicit when-guidance via '当用户提到…时激活' and '也在用户…时激活'. Both what and when are explicitly present with triggers. Not score 2 because the when-clause is explicit, not merely implied.

It enumerates natural terms a user would actually say — 喜好、兴趣、习惯、身体状况、作息规律、家庭规则 — plus 修正记录、删除、查询家庭档案, giving good coverage of phrasings users naturally produce. Not score 2 because common variations are well represented rather than missing.

The niche is clearly scoped to family profiles and family-member preferences/habits/health/routines/rules, with distinct triggers unlikely to fire for unrelated skills. Not score 2 because the trigger set is family-profile-specific rather than broadly overlapping with generic document or identity skills.