Conciseness

The body is lean and operational: a four-command workflow, a compact recorded/inferred table, terse hard rules, an exit-code table, and one-line reference descriptions. The short opening paragraph states the skill's premise (memory drops critical details) rather than explaining concepts Claude already knows, so every section earns its place — anchor 5, not anchor 4 which requires trimmable over-explanation.

Actionability

Commands are copy-paste ready with real flags and example values ('trace_finder.py --since 7d --touched config.yaml', 'trace_timeline.py --trace <path> --why 9', 'claim_checker.py --claim "passed:pytest"'), and the scripts table documents exit codes plus universal flags (--help, --sample, --output json). This fully matches anchor 5's 'fully executable, copy-paste ready' coverage of the common cases.

Workflow Clarity

A clear four-step numbered sequence with a skip condition (hook supplies this session's path), per-step comments on what each yields, an explicit validation step (step 4 checks every summary claim before repeating it as fact), and feedback loops for error recovery (exit 2 -> 'not recorded here, do not reconstruct'; exit 4 contradiction -> 'correct the account first'). This matches anchor 5; anchor 4 would lack some of these checkpoints.

Progressive Disclosure

The body is a well-organized overview with clearly signaled one-level-deep links to references/ and assets/, each with a one-line description and size hint, and all those files exist in the bundle. It falls short of anchor 5 because the body references hooks/forensics_hint.py, which is not present in the bundle (no hooks/ directory), leaving one dangling path a reader cannot resolve.

Specificity

Lists several specific capabilities ('why an agent did something', 'what a past session or run changed', 'whether tests really passed', 'verify a session summary') and names three concrete tools (trace_finder.py, trace_timeline.py, claim_checker.py). Falls short of anchor 5 because it describes question types it answers rather than a comprehensive list of concrete actions, and exceeds anchor 3's '1-2 concrete actions'.

Completeness

Explicitly answers 'when' with a 'Use when asked...' clause listing four concrete trigger phrases, and 'what' with 'Answers from the recorded transcript, not memory, with trace_finder.py, trace_timeline.py and claim_checker.py'. Both are explicit and concrete, matching anchor 5 rather than anchor 4 where the 'when' would be less specific.

Trigger Term Quality

Includes natural phrases users would actually say ('whether tests really passed', 'verify a session summary', 'why an agent did something') plus domain terms like 'recorded transcript' and 'past session or run'. Not anchor 5 because common synonyms such as 'history', 'audit', or 'what did you do yesterday' are missing; better than anchor 3 since multiple natural phrasings are covered.

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

Has a clear niche (forensic answers about past agent runs from recorded transcripts) with mostly distinct triggers. Minor overlap risk remains: 'whether tests really passed' could fire on ordinary test-status questions and 'verify a session summary' on summary-writing requests, matching anchor 4 ('minor overlap risk with closely related skills') rather than anchor 5's minimal conflict risk.