Conciseness

The body is lean throughout: a commented 4-command workflow block, terse step explanations, one-line hard rules ('The body says why. The diff already says what.'), and no explanation of concepts Claude already knows. The three-line motivation ('Committed as one blob, that diff cannot be reviewed, reverted or bisected') earns its place; every other token is operational. Fits the 'every token earns its place' anchor.

Actionability

Commands are copy-paste executable: 'python scripts/commit_planner.py', 'python scripts/secret_gate.py', 'python scripts/message_linter.py -m "<message>" --staged && git commit -m "<message>"', 'git rebase -x "<test command>" @{upstream}'. Exit codes are tabulated per script and 'All support --help, --sample and --output json' tells Claude how to discover more. Placeholders like '<files of group N>' are inherently user-specific, not gaps.

Workflow Clarity

Clear numbered 4-step sequence with explicit validation checkpoints at each stage: gate before the commit exists ('A blocked gate means no commit'), linter before committing, and pre-push proof that every commit builds ('git rebase -x "<test command>"'). Error-recovery feedback is stated ('Remove the value and load it at runtime', waiver via '.commit-craft-allow'), and hooks plus a pre-push checklist reinforce the loop. The batch-operation cap does not apply since validation is thorough.

Progressive Disclosure

The body is a genuine overview (~70 lines) that keeps detail in one-level-deep bundle files, each listed with a one-line description ('split, order and verify, with sources (7)', 'what the gate catches… and the leak response order'). All referenced paths — references/commit_series_design.md, references/message_discipline.md, references/secret_response.md, assets/hooks/, assets/commit-craft-allow.example, assets/series_checklist.md, and the three scripts — exist in the bundle, and nothing is nested deeper than one level.

Specificity

Quotes concrete actions — 'Turn a mix of changes into clean, reviewable commits', 'with good messages', 'blocking staged secrets and .env files' — naming the domain plus several specific capabilities. Not 5 because coverage has minor gaps (e.g., series ordering/verification is absent); not 3 because it lists more than 1-2 actions.

Completeness

Explicitly answers both: what ('Turn a mix of changes into clean, reviewable commits with good messages, blocking staged secrets and .env files') and when ('Use whenever the user says commit this, wants to split work into commits, write a commit message, or is about to push') with concrete trigger phrases. Matches the 5 anchor exactly.

Trigger Term Quality

Includes natural phrases users would actually say: 'commit this', 'split work into commits', 'write a commit message', 'about to push'. Not 5 because common variations like 'make a commit', 'git commit', or 'commit history' are missing; not 3 because coverage goes well beyond a single generic keyword.

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

Clear niche — shaping commits before they exist plus a secret gate — with distinct trigger phrasing. Not 5 because 'about to push' and 'write a commit message' could overlap with push-review or changelog-type skills; not 3 because the core triggers are specific to commit crafting.