Conciseness

The body is lean and operational throughout (commands, type table, examples, fallbacks) and never explains git or branching concepts Claude already knows; every section earns its tokens.

Actionability

It provides copy-paste-ready commands (gh api user --jq .login, git checkout -b, git show-ref) and a concrete examples table covering common cases, leaving no execution gap.

Workflow Clarity

Five clearly sequenced steps include explicit validation (git show-ref name-collision check) and error-recovery feedback loops (restore stashed changes on failure, detached-HEAD and non-default-branch handling).

Progressive Disclosure

With no bundle files, the single coherent workflow is well-organized into labeled sections with one clearly signaled one-level reference (the Sentry Branch Naming URL), needing no file split.

Specificity

The description names the domain (git branch) and one concrete action ('Create a git branch following Sentry naming conventions'), matching the 1-2 concrete actions anchor; it is not generic enough for a 2 nor broad enough for a 4.

Completeness

It explicitly answers both 'what' (Create a git branch following Sentry naming conventions) and 'when' (Use when asked to ... or when starting new work on the default branch) with concrete trigger phrases, matching the top anchor.

Trigger Term Quality

It lists multiple natural synonyms users would actually say ('create a branch', 'new branch', 'start a branch', 'make a branch', 'switch to a new branch') plus a contextual trigger ('starting new work on the default branch'), giving comprehensive natural-term coverage.

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

The Sentry-convention niche is mostly distinct, but the trigger phrasings ('create a branch', 'new branch') could overlap with general git/branch skills, so it sits at minor overlap risk rather than minimal.