Conciseness

The body is dense and assumes Claude's competence — it never pads with basics (no "what is a trademark" explanations) and pushes research depth to references. A few persuasive-rationale sentences could be trimmed ("which corrupts the judgement", "a founder can build a business on such a name and still never own it"), which places it at anchor 4 (minor instances of over-explanation) rather than 5 (every token earns its place).

Actionability

For an instruction-only skill the guidance is fully executable: the eight fit checks each carry specific criteria, the WIPO scale is enumerated (generic through coined) with per-market judging rules, sound symbolism is concretely mapped ("Front vowels (ee, i) read light and quick; back vowels (o, u) solid and heavy"), Step 3c lists explicit reject conditions, and Step 4 specifies the exact output format (compact table, cells hold "a symbol plus 2–4 words (e.g. `❌ reads as slur (EN)`)"). This matches anchor 5 for instruction skills: concrete, specific guidance covering common cases.

Workflow Clarity

Steps 1–5 are clearly sequenced with explicit validation and feedback loops: the gating find-or-check question, the three-constraint rule with a retry path ("A name that meets only two of the three is not a valid suggestion — drop it and find another"), Step 3e re-running surviving candidates through the Step 2 checks, and Step 5's closing verification checklist. This matches anchor 5's clear sequence with explicit validation steps and error-recovery loops.

Progressive Disclosure

The body is a self-contained overview workflow, with both detail files real, one level deep, and explicitly signaled with read-when conditions: "read it when a founder asks *why*, or when a name category or sound effect needs explaining in depth" and "read it when you need a model for how a finished analysis should read". Content is appropriately split (research sources and worked cases external; the decision procedure inline), matching anchor 5.

Specificity

"Suggest, pick, or vet a business, startup, or product name" names the domain plus several concrete actions, reinforced by trigger-level actions like "spotting bad meanings in other languages" and "making a name sound trustworthy in a specific market". It falls short of anchor 5's comprehensive coverage because the verbs cluster around one action family (name selection/vetting) and the deeper checks the skill performs (sound, spelling, trademark-distinctiveness categories) are not surfaced.

Completeness

Both what and when are explicit: the what is "Suggest, pick, or vet a business, startup, or product name that stays true to the founder's cultural origin while working professionally in the markets they want to sell into", and the when is a concrete "Use when..." clause plus "Trigger this for any request about choosing a business name...". This mirrors anchor 5's example structure.

Trigger Term Quality

Natural phrases users would actually say are comprehensively covered: "naming a company, brand, or product", "choosing a business name", "checking if a name 'works' abroad", "bad meanings in other languages", with synonyms company/brand/product/business/startup all present. This matches anchor 5's comprehensive natural-term coverage (file extensions are inapplicable in this domain).

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

The cross-cultural/cross-market angle ("stays true to the founder's cultural origin", "how it lands across languages and regions") carves a clear niche, but "naming a company, brand, or product" is a request general branding or copywriting skills could also claim, leaving minor overlap risk with closely related skills — anchor 4 rather than 5.