Conciseness

The body is dense and assumes domain competence — it never explains what PMax, GA4, or negative keywords are — but the delegation to ad-account-auditor ("does not compute the final RQS") is restated in the intro, the Skill Contract, step 8, the Scope guard, and Next Best Skill. That is minor over-explanation that could be trimmed to one place, so anchor 4 fits better than anchor 5.

Actionability

Guidance is largely concrete for an instruction-only skill: typed profiles with numeric A weights (0.15/0.30/0.10), exact save paths, named exports (GA4 traffic-acquisition), and transparency-library URLs. It stops short of anchor 5 because the core decision rule — how goal/intent maturity/feed readiness map to Search vs PMax vs broad — is deferred entirely to roas-benchmark.md rather than stated inline.

Workflow Clarity

Eight clearly sequenced steps plus a "Done when" completion checklist and explicit unknown handling ("mark qualified ROAS-A1 Unknown with its gap reason", "NEEDS_INPUT/UNDECIDED/NOT_SCORED") provide most checkpoints. It misses anchor 5 because there is no feedback loop for recovery — e.g., what to re-check once a missing export is supplied — so checkpoints are present but the retry path is implicit.

Progressive Disclosure

The body is a clear ~70-line overview with a dedicated, annotated Reference Materials section and one-level-deep references (roas-benchmark.md, skill-contract.md, CONNECTORS.md, SECURITY.md), with the heavy benchmark and contract detail appropriately split out. No bundle directories (references/, scripts/, assets/) exist alongside the skill to verify against, but the in-body structure matches the anchor-5 example: well-signaled references and easy navigation.

Specificity

The description lists multiple concrete actions — "designs campaign-type selection, ad-group/asset-group layout, targeting + match types, negative/exclusion hygiene, and a paid↔organic overlap audit, and scores the ROAS A (Audience) dimension + structure" — giving comprehensive coverage of the skill's capabilities. This matches the anchor-5 example (multiple specific concrete actions) rather than anchor 4, which implies minor gaps in coverage.

Completeness

It explicitly answers both what ("designs campaign-type selection, ad-group/asset-group layout, targeting + match types, negative/exclusion hygiene…") and when ("Use when the user asks to…") with concrete trigger phrases. It even adds explicit anti-triggers ("Not for computing the final RQS — use ad-account-auditor"), matching the anchor-5 example exactly.

Trigger Term Quality

Natural quoted triggers ("plan my paid account structure", "pick Search vs PMax", "lay out ad groups / asset groups", "audit paid-vs-organic cannibalization") plus domain terms give good keyword coverage. It falls short of anchor 5 because common English variations users would say — "negative keywords", "match types", "campaign structure" — appear only as capability nouns or in the Chinese summary, not as trigger phrases.

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

The skill occupies a clear niche (paid account structure + ROAS A scoring) and explicitly fences off the three neighboring skills by name ("use ad-account-auditor", "use budget-optimizer", "use site-structure-optimizer"), giving minimal conflict risk. Not anchor 4, because no overlap risk with closely related skills is left unaddressed.