Conciseness

The ~40-line body is dense and purposeful: exact file path, a four-row table instead of prose, terse imperatives ("Before any run, read it. If it is missing, ask for it"), and no explanation of concepts Claude already knows. Every token carries a non-obvious constraint or instruction, matching the lean anchor; there is nothing to trim without losing the contract.

Actionability

Guidance is fully concrete for an instruction-only skill: the exact path `.ywai/app-guide.md`, explicit behaviors for both consumption ("Before any run, read it. If it is missing, ask for it — do not reconstruct launch steps from memory") and authoring ("fill in the four sections, list every placeholder name under Secrets, and stop there"), plus a copy-paste-ready example guide covering the common case. No missing steps or pseudocode.

Workflow Clarity

This is a simple single-purpose skill under 50 lines, and the single action is unambiguous with an explicit conditional branch (read before any run; if missing, ask rather than reconstruct), an explicit editing procedure (fill four sections, list placeholders, stop), and a self-check ("A guide longer than a screen is two guides"). No destructive or batch operations exist, so the validation cap does not apply, and the simple-skill exception holds.

Progressive Disclosure

The skill is under 50 lines with no need for external references (no references/, scripts/, or assets/ bundles exist, and none are linked), and the body is organized into clear sections (purpose, four-section table, secrets policy, authoring rules, example). Per the under-50-lines guideline, well-organized sections alone earn the top score.

Specificity

"Per-repo app guide for QA agents" names the domain, and the trigger list names concrete items ("launch the app", "sign in to test", "never-do list"), but these are user situations rather than the skill's actions — what the skill actually does (read the guide before runs, write/edit guides with the four sections) is not explicitly stated, leaving coverage incomplete. Not a 4 because anchor 4 expects several specific actions with only minor gaps, while here the capability description stops at identifying the artifact.

Completeness

Both halves are present: a "what" ("Per-repo app guide for QA agents") and an explicit trigger clause ("Trigger: launch the app, sign in to test, QA run setup, never-do list"), so the missing-'Use when' cap at 3 does not apply. Not a 5 because the "what" is indirect — it identifies the artifact rather than stating what the skill does with it, and the when-clause could name more concrete trigger phrases.

Trigger Term Quality

"launch the app, sign in to test, QA run setup, never-do list" are natural phrases a user or operator would plausibly say, giving good keyword coverage. Not a 5 because common synonyms and variations are missing (e.g., "start the app", "test account", "app onboarding", "run setup").

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

The niche is clear (per-repo guides for QA agents, with distinctive terms like "never-do list" and "QA run setup"), so conflict risk is low. Not a 5 because "launch the app" and "sign in to test" overlap with generic run-the-app / app-testing skills, a minor but real overlap with closely related skills.