Conciseness

The four-step core process is efficient and concrete, but the "Common Rationalizations" persuasion table (e.g. "'Fetching docs wastes tokens' | Hallucinating an API wastes more") and the heavy redundancy between the "Red Flags" list and the "Verification" checklist are unnecessary padding. This is more than the 'minor instances' of the 4 anchor, though most sections remain efficient, keeping it above 2.

Actionability

Fully actionable for an instruction-only skill: a dependency-file mapping table, exact fetch targets ("react.dev/reference/react/useActionState"), and copy-paste-ready templates for every common case — STACK DETECTED, CONFLICT DETECTED, in-code citations, and the UNVERIFIED flag — covering the workflow end to end.

Workflow Clarity

The DETECT → FETCH → IMPLEMENT → CITE sequence is explicitly numbered with checkpoints at each step (ask the user on ambiguous versions, surface conflicts with options, flag unverified patterns) plus a final verification checklist. Feedback loops and error-recovery paths are present, matching the top anchor; no destructive/batch cap applies.

Progressive Disclosure

Well-organized single file with clear section headers, and it properly delegates the prompt-injection threat model to the `security-and-hardening` skill instead of duplicating it. It falls short of 5 because at ~210 lines with no bundle files, material like the retrieval-hygiene section and source hierarchy could live in one-level-deep reference files to slim the always-loaded body.

Specificity

Names the domain and several concrete actions — "Grounds every implementation decision in official documentation", "verify an approach against the official docs", "source-cited code" — with minor gaps. It stays at 4 rather than 5 because the actions are variations on one verify-and-cite theme rather than a comprehensive list of distinct capabilities.

Completeness

Clearly answers both what ("Grounds every implementation decision in official documentation", "authoritative, source-cited code") and when, with two explicit "Use when..." clauses containing concrete trigger conditions. It matches the top anchor because both halves are explicit and specific.

Trigger Term Quality

Includes natural phrases users would say — "official docs", "verify an approach", "outdated patterns", "framework or library" — but misses common synonyms such as "best practices", "up-to-date", or "API reference", so coverage is good rather than comprehensive.

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

The verify-against-official-docs niche is mostly distinct from other skills, but the trigger "building with any framework or library where correctness matters" is broad, leaving minor overlap risk with general research or documentation skills. Not 5 because that breadth means it could fire in many coding contexts.