Conciseness

The ~70-line body is maximally dense with zero padding: "The body says why. The diff already says what.", "A blocked gate means no commit.", and a compact exit-code table. No git or commit concepts Claude already knows are explained, and the two-sentence intro motivates the skill without teaching basics. It is not 4 because no over-explanatory passages exist to trim.

Actionability

Every workflow step is a copy-paste-ready command: "python scripts/commit_planner.py", "git add -- <files of group N>" (with a "git add -p" alternative for MIXED_FORMATTING files), "python scripts/secret_gate.py", "python scripts/message_linter.py -m \"<message>\" --staged && git commit -m \"<message>\"", "git rebase -x \"<test command>\" @{upstream}". Placeholders are necessarily data-dependent, exit codes are tabulated per script, and --help/--sample/--output json are documented. It is not 4 because the common path is fully executable end to end.

Workflow Clarity

The bash block sequences four numbered steps (# 1 Plan ... # 4 Before push) each explained below, with explicit validation at every stage: the secret gate "blocks before the commit exists", the linter gates each message pre-commit, and step 4 proves the whole series builds via "git rebase -x". Error recovery is explicit ("A blocked gate means no commit. Remove the value and load it at runtime. Never --no-verify"; waiver via .commit-craft-allow with a required reason), and a pre-push checklist asset exists. Because this history-rewriting skill has explicit checkpoints and feedback loops, the batch/destructive cap at 3 does not apply; it is not 4 because validation is explicit and prominent at every stage rather than mostly present.

Progressive Disclosure

The body is a lean overview with all details split into three reference files and four assets, each verified to exist on disk and one level deep, each introduced with a one-line description (e.g. "[references/commit_series_design.md]: split, order and verify, with sources (7)"). Navigation is a single clearly labeled section. It is not 4 because every referenced path resolves to a real file and no organization gaps remain.

Specificity

"Turn a mix of changes into clean, reviewable commits with good messages, blocking staged secrets and .env files" lists multiple concrete actions — series splitting, message writing, secret blocking — with comprehensive coverage of the skill's domain. It is not 4 because no minor gaps in capability coverage are evident: the description names every core behavior the skill performs.

Completeness

The first sentence explicitly states what the skill does ("Turn a mix of changes into clean, reviewable commits with good messages, blocking staged secrets and .env files") and the second explicitly states when with concrete trigger phrases ("Use whenever the user says commit this..."). It is not 4 because the when-clause is fully explicit rather than merely present or generic.

Trigger Term Quality

"the user says commit this", "wants to split work into commits", "write a commit message", "is about to push" are verbatim natural phrasings users would say, with synonym coverage across the domain. It is not 4 because no common natural term for this domain is missing.

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

Series splitting and secret gating form a clear niche with distinct triggers, but "write a commit message" would also fire a commit-message-generation skill, creating minor overlap risk with closely related skills. It is not 5 because of that trigger overlap; it is not 3 because the core pre-commit shaping niche is clearly distinguishable from reviewers, changelog generators, and worktree managers.