Conciseness

The body is dense with genuinely specialized data (penalty multipliers under 19 USC § 1592, RVC formulas, ISF data elements, drawback rules), but it also pads with a role-playing paragraph ('a senior trade compliance specialist with 15+ years') and explains concepts Claude already knows ('The Harmonized System is a 6-digit international nomenclature maintained by the WCO', 'Incoterms... are not law'). This matches the 3 anchor ('mostly efficient but includes some unnecessary explanation'); it is not a 2 because the majority of the content is non-generic regulatory detail that Claude cannot reliably recall.

Actionability

Concrete guidance dominates: ordered decision frameworks, specific statutes and thresholds ('Matches below 85% name similarity... are likely false positives'), executable formulas (RVC = ((TV - VNM) / TV) × 100), escalation timelines, and template structures. It falls short of 5 because the communication templates are element lists ('Include: entry numbers, dates, specific violations...') rather than copy-paste-ready text, and no complete worked example (e.g., a filled prior disclosure) is provided.

Workflow Clarity

Multi-step processes are clearly sequenced (7-step classification logic, 6-step FTA qualification, 5-step screening protocol) with checkpoints ('Validate at the subheading level', 'Never proceed with a transaction while a screening hit is unresolved', 'Document the rationale'). It is not a 5 because there are no explicit validate-fix-retry feedback loops, and the sequence in 'How It Works' duplicates rather than references the detailed frameworks.

Progressive Disclosure

No bundle files exist (no references/, scripts/, or assets/), and the ~240-line body inlines core knowledge, regional specialties, edge cases, communication templates, and metrics tables that would serve better as separate reference files. Section headers are well-organized, which keeps it at 3 ('some structure but... content that should be separate is inline') rather than 2, but a skill this size offers no progressive disclosure at all — everything loads into context on every invocation.

Specificity

The description lists multiple concrete actions — 'HS/HTS tariff classification with GRI rules', 'commercial invoices and entry documentation', 'denied-party screening', 'penalty mitigation', 'duty optimization (USMCA, RCEP, FTZs, drawback)' — with named programs and jurisdictions, matching the comprehensive-coverage anchor. It exceeds the 4 anchor because no significant capability area of the skill body is left out.

Completeness

Both questions are explicitly answered: the 'what' is the detailed capability list, and the 'when' is a concrete 'Use when' clause enumerating trigger scenarios (classifying, documentation, screening, audits/CF-28, duty optimization). This matches the 5 anchor exactly and exceeds 4 because the 'when' is specific rather than general.

Trigger Term Quality

Natural phrases users would say are present ('classifying goods', 'preparing import/export documentation', 'screening restricted parties', 'customs audits or CF-28/penalty notices', 'optimizing duties'), but common variations like 'sanctions', 'customs broker', 'imports/exports', or plain 'customs' are missing. This matches the 4 anchor (good coverage, a few natural terms missing) rather than 5's comprehensive synonym coverage.

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

The customs/trade compliance niche is clear and triggers are highly distinctive ('Incoterms 2020', 'CF-28/penalty notices', 'drawback', 'USMCA'), creating minimal overlap risk with other skills. It fits the 5 anchor's 'clear niche with distinct triggers' better than 4, which contemplates meaningful overlap with closely related skills.