Conciseness

The body is lean and tabular, conveying only OMX-specific facts Claude could not know (state files, presets, config keys) with no padding or generic explanations. Minor trims remain: the version-gated "Codex CLI v0.101.0+" appears twice as a time-sensitive detail outside any deprecation/notes section, and Layer 1 config is explained in both the architecture overview and its own section. Fits anchor 4 ("Efficient; minor instances of over-explanation that could be trimmed"), not anchor 5.

Actionability

Guidance is largely copy-paste ready: exact CLI commands ("omx hud --watch", "omx hud --preset=full"), an exact TOML block for the built-in statusline, the JSON config file, and precise state-file paths. Minor gaps keep it from anchor 5: the "--json" flag's output shape is never shown, and the hud-config.json example reveals only the "preset" key, leaving the rest of the config schema unspecified.

Workflow Clarity

Setup is a clear one-shot flow ("omx setup" configures both layers) with an explicit recovery checkpoint ("if HUD/statusline changes do not appear, restart Codex CLI once"), and troubleshooting is a numbered sequence (check version, run setup, restart). The missing explicit post-change verification step (e.g. confirm the statusline actually renders) places it at anchor 4 rather than 5's "explicit validation steps; feedback loops". No destructive or batch operations, so the workflow cap does not apply.

Progressive Disclosure

With no bundle files, the single-file body is well organized into scannable sections (commands table, presets, layers, config, troubleshooting) that are easy to navigate. The body exceeds 50 lines, so the simple-skill 5 exception does not apply, and the 16-item built-in statusline inventory plus preset layouts could arguably live in a reference file — anchor 4 ("Good structure; most content is appropriately placed; minor organization gaps").

Specificity

"Show or configure the OMX HUD (two-layer statusline)" names the domain and exactly two concrete actions (show, configure), but omits capabilities documented in the body such as presets, live watch mode, and JSON output. This matches anchor 3 ("Names domain and 1-2 concrete actions, but not comprehensive"), not anchor 4 which requires several specific actions listed.

Completeness

The "what" is clear (show or configure the OMX HUD statusline), but there is no "Use when..." clause or equivalent trigger guidance — the "when" is entirely absent, not merely weakly implied. Per the judging guideline, a missing 'Use when...' clause caps completeness at 3.

Trigger Term Quality

Relevant keywords "HUD", "statusline", and "OMX" are present, but common natural variations a user would actually say are missing ("status line" as two words, "status bar", "status"). Fits anchor 3 ("Some relevant keywords but missing common variations or synonyms") rather than anchor 4's "good keyword coverage; a few natural terms missing".

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

"OMX HUD" carves out a clear niche tied to a specific tool, so conflict risk is low, but "statusline" is a generic term that overlaps with generic statusline-configuration skills. Mostly distinct with minor overlap risk matches anchor 4; anchor 5 would require triggers that are unambiguous against all related skills.