Conciseness

Mostly efficient phase and workflow sections, but 'Why Phase 2 Isolation Matters' re-explains groupthink/anchoring concepts Claude already knows, and the 'Why This Beats gstack's Review Chain' comparison table is competitive positioning that adds no instructional value. Not 4 because these padded sections exceed minor trimming; not 2 because the bulk of the body is instructive.

Actionability

Concrete guidance throughout: named advisor roles with owned critique dimensions ('cs-cfo-advisor critiques the math'), file paths ('~/.claude/briefs/<file>', '~/.claude/boardroom/YYYY-MM-DD-<slug>.md'), a complete board-memo template, and the '/em:challenge' invocation. Not 5 because the mechanics of 'Invoke each cs-* advisor independently' (tool, prompt) are unspecified and the description's 'critic pre-screen' never appears in the body.

Workflow Clarity

A clear 6-phase sequence plus an explicit 8-step Workflow section and a Phase 6 accept/modify/reject decision checkpoint. Not 5 because no feedback loops exist for failure states (no majority option, brief missing affected roles, advisor unavailable); not 3 because sequencing and the final checkpoint are explicit.

Progressive Disclosure

Well-organized single-file body with clear section headers; the memo template is appropriately inline and 'Related' links are one level and clearly signaled. Not 5 because the cross-plugin relative links ('../../agents/cs-chief-of-staff.md') are fragile and unverified, and the marketing comparison table dilutes the overview; not 3 because structure and navigation are otherwise good.

Specificity

Lists several concrete actions ('6-phase multi-role deliberation across the C-suite with Phase 2 isolation, critic pre-screen, and synthesis. Outputs a board memo') with minor gaps — the phases themselves are not named and 'critic pre-screen' leans on jargon. Not 5 because coverage is not comprehensive; not 3 because it goes well beyond 1-2 actions.

Completeness

Explicitly answers both: what ('6-phase multi-role deliberation across the C-suite... Outputs a board memo') and when ('Use when a decision spans multiple executive domains') with concrete trigger examples. Matches the 5 anchor exactly.

Trigger Term Quality

'Use when a decision spans multiple executive domains — e.g. a pricing change touching finance, positioning, and product, or a raise-vs-cut runway call' supplies natural phrases a founder would say. Not 5 because common variations like 'board meeting', 'strategy review', or 'get my executives' input' are absent; not 3 because several relevant natural terms are present.

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

Clear niche (multi-domain executive deliberation, memo output) with concrete triggers, but the description covers the same protocol as its parent 'board-meeting' skill and sits adjacent to sibling /cs: commands, creating minor overlap risk. Not 5 because of that overlap; not 3 because the trigger examples carve a distinct use case.