Conciseness

The body is dense and domain-specific with no padding about concepts Claude already knows, but there are minor instances of over-explanation and repetition: the Forrester POST-method attribution ("Li & Bernoff, Groundswell, 2008 is the attributed precedent... cited descriptively — scoring stays on ECHO") is unnecessary meta-commentary, and adjacent-skill routing is stated three times (Instructions step 5, Reference Materials, Next Best Skill). Not a 5 because those tokens could be trimmed; not a 3 because the verbosity is only minor against otherwise lean, purposeful prose.

Actionability

Mostly concrete guidance for an instruction-only skill: named keyless scripts (`scripts/connectors/pageviews.py`, `scripts/connectors/hn.py`), a concrete save path (`memory/social/channel-portfolio-planner/YYYY-MM-DD-<topic>.md`), realistic Quick Start examples, and specific done-when criteria. Not a 5 because the capability matrix has no scoring scale or template, hours/week estimation has no method, and `registry-events.py` is invoked without any invocation syntax or argument example.

Workflow Clarity

Eight clearly sequenced steps with an explicit NEEDS_INPUT stop-and-route (step 1), a done-when checklist (all four capability columns filled, portfolio fits staffing budget), and inherited termination rules (visited-set, max-depth 3, ambiguity stop). Not a 5 because the feedback loop for registry rejection is not addressed — step 7 says "the registry accepts or rejects" but what to do on rejection is left unspecified; not a 3 because validation checkpoints (done-when, NEEDS_INPUT, budget fit) are explicit and present.

Progressive Disclosure

Good structure: a consolidated Reference Materials list with one-line purpose descriptions per link, a dedicated Data Sources section, and one-level-deep references signaled inline throughout the steps. Not a 5 because no bundle files are present in the skill directory to verify — references traverse far outside it (`../../../references/...`, `references/platforms/`) and cannot be confirmed to exist, and the cross-skill links are scattered across many sections rather than centralized. Not a 3 because the body itself is well-organized and every reference is clearly signaled with its purpose.

Specificity

The description lists multiple concrete deliverables — "produces an audience/objective-first portfolio with capability/access matrix, cadence-budget reality check, declared ECHO operating profile, boundary routing, and proposed-state registry events" — giving comprehensive, specific coverage of what the skill does. It is not the level below (4) because the action list is comprehensive rather than having minor gaps.

Completeness

Explicitly answers both questions: "Use when the user asks to 'pick which social channels to run'..." gives concrete trigger phrases for when, and the produces-clause gives a clear what, with a negative boundary ("Not for recording canonical channel facts — use channel-registry") on top. Not the level below (4) because the when-clause is explicit and uses quoted trigger phrases rather than being merely adequate.

Trigger Term Quality

Includes natural phrases users would actually say ("pick which social channels to run", "should we be on X platform or 小红书", "plan our organic social channel portfolio") plus Chinese synonyms (社媒渠道选择/渠道组合规划/平台能力矩阵/自然社媒). Not a 5 because common English variations like "which social media platforms should we use" or "social media strategy" are missing, and some capability phrasing ("proposed-state registry events") is internal jargon rather than user vocabulary.

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

Clear niche (organic social channel portfolio selection) with an explicit disambiguation clause routing canonical-fact work to channel-registry, minimizing conflict with adjacent skills. Not below 5 because the explicit "Not for..." routing removes the residual overlap risk a closely related skill set would otherwise carry.