Conciseness

The body is dense and load-bearing (commands, prompts, JSON schemas, verdict table), but has minor trimmable redundancy: the Verdict Reference table restates the verdict definitions already given in the subagent prompt, and the 'deterministic collection + LLM judgment' principle is stated in both the intro and Design Principles. Fits 4 (efficient, minor over-explanation) rather than 5 (every token earns its place).

Actionability

Fully executable guidance: copy-paste bash commands ("bash ~/.claude/skills/rules-distill/scripts/scan-skills.sh"), a complete ready-to-launch subagent prompt with exact JSON output format, timestamp/Candidate-ID specs, and a worked end-to-end example. Matches the 5 anchor (copy-paste ready, covers common cases); not 4 because there are no significant gaps.

Workflow Clarity

Three phases are clearly sequenced (inventory → cross-read/verdict → user review/execution), and the batch/destructive operation (modifying rule files) is gated by an explicit checkpoint: "Never modify rules automatically. Always require user approval." with approve/modify/skip feedback and a cross-batch merge that re-checks the 2+ skills requirement. Matches the 5 anchor; the destructive-batch cap of 3 does not apply since validation is present.

Progressive Disclosure

Referenced bundle files (scripts/scan-skills.sh, scripts/scan-rules.sh) exist, are one level deep, and are clearly signaled; sections are well organized. However, the ~50-line inline subagent prompt and ~50-line example run are content that could be split into reference files to keep SKILL.md a leaner overview. Fits 4 (good structure, minor organization gaps) rather than 5.

Specificity

"Scan skills to extract cross-cutting principles and distill them into rules — append, revise, or create new rule files" lists multiple concrete actions (scan, extract, distill, append, revise, create) with comprehensive coverage of all output modes, matching the 5 anchor. It is not 4 because there are no minor gaps in the action coverage.

Completeness

It explicitly answers both: what ("Scan skills to extract cross-cutting principles and distill them into rules — append, revise, or create new rule files") and when ("Use when the same principle keeps recurring across skills and belongs in a rule file instead") with a concrete trigger phrase, exactly matching the 5 anchor. Not 4 because the 'when' clause is fully explicit, not merely improvable.

Trigger Term Quality

Natural phrases like "the same principle keeps recurring across skills" and "belongs in a rule file" give good keyword coverage, but a few natural user phrasings/synonyms (e.g., "extract principles", "distill rules") are not enumerated. It fits 4 (good coverage, a few terms missing) rather than 5 (synonym- and extension-level comprehensiveness).

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

"Cross-cutting principles" appearing "in 2+ skills" promoted to rule files is a clear niche with distinct triggers and minimal conflict risk with other skills. Not 4 because no meaningful overlap with closely related skills is identifiable from the description.