Conciseness

The body avoids explaining concepts Claude already knows and its commands are compact, but it carries real redundancy: the "Red Flags" section repeats "Common Mistakes" (verify tests, discard confirmation, worktree cleanup), the Quick Reference table restates the options, and "When to Use" is a pure filler sentence ("This skill is applicable to execute the workflow or actions described in the overview."). This matches the 'mostly efficient but could be tightened' anchor rather than the minor-trim 4 anchor because three sections largely duplicate other content.

Actionability

Fully executable throughout: concrete git commands for every option, exact user-facing prompts to present (the 4-option block, the discard confirmation requiring typed 'discard'), a complete `gh pr create` command with a heredoc PR template, and worktree cleanup commands. Placeholders like <base-branch> and <test command> are appropriate project-specific parameterization, matching the copy-paste-ready 5 anchor.

Workflow Clarity

The 5-step sequence is explicit with strong validation checkpoints (tests must pass before options are offered, tests verified on merged result, typed confirmation for the destructive discard). It falls below the 5 anchor because of an internal contradiction on worktree cleanup: Step 5 says cleanup applies to Options 1, 2, and 4, while the Quick Reference table, Common Mistakes ("Only cleanup for Options 1 and 4"), and Red Flags all say Option 2's worktree should be kept — an ambiguity in a destructive operation. Still above the 3 anchor because checkpoints and feedback loops (stop on failing tests, fix-then-retest) are explicit and well-defined.

Progressive Disclosure

This is a single-file skill with no references/, scripts/, or assets/ directories, and none are needed — the workflow is one coherent procedure that doesn't warrant splitting. Sections are clearly organized and navigable (Process, Quick Reference, Common Mistakes, Integration). It sits at the 4 anchor (good structure, well-placed content, minor organization gaps) rather than 5 because the redundant Common Mistakes/Red Flags/Quick Reference sections could be consolidated, and the ~200-line body is above the under-50-line simple-skill case where organization alone earns a 5.

Specificity

"guides completion of development work by presenting structured options for merge, PR, or cleanup" names the domain (development branch completion) and several concrete actions (present options, merge, PR, cleanup). Not a 5 because it omits other options the skill actually covers (keep branch as-is, discard), so coverage has minor gaps; not a 3 because it lists several specific actions rather than just 1-2 generic ones.

Completeness

Both halves are explicit: the "what" ("presenting structured options for merge, PR, or cleanup") and a concrete "when" clause with trigger conditions ("Use when implementation is complete, all tests pass, and you need to decide how to integrate the work"). This matches the 5 anchor's pattern of concrete what + explicit trigger phrases; the 4 anchor applies only when the 'when' is vague, which it is not.

Trigger Term Quality

Trigger phrases like "implementation is complete", "all tests pass", "decide how to integrate the work", "merge", "PR" are natural things a user would say. Missing a few common synonyms ("pull request" spelled out, "finish the branch", "worktree"), which keeps it below the comprehensive 5 anchor.

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

The niche (deciding how to integrate completed work on a dev branch) is distinct from most skills, and the trigger conditions (implementation complete + tests passing) further narrow it. Minor overlap risk with generic PR-creation or commit-message skills keeps it below the 5 anchor.