Conciseness

The body is dense and skill-specific — the taxonomy and provider tables encode curated judgment, not textbook explanation — but there are minor instances that could be trimmed: the provider chooser table partially duplicates 'references/provider_comparison.md' beyond what a summary requires, and the per-script detection-heuristic prose restates what the scripts' --help already provides. It fits the level-4 anchor (efficient, minor over-explanation trimmable) rather than level 5 ('every token earns its place'), and is clearly above level 3 since there is no padding or explanation of concepts Claude already knows.

Actionability

Commands are copy-paste ready throughout: three quick-start invocations with concrete flags (--population 100000 --target-percent 100 --duration-days 14 --strategy ring), per-tool variants, and numbered workflows. Not level 5 because of one gap: the body and frontmatter advertise a '/flag-cleanup' slash command, but no command definition file exists in the bundle (no commands/ directory), so that instruction is not executable as shipped. Well above level 3, which requires pseudocode or missing key details.

Workflow Clarity

All four workflows are explicitly sequenced with validation checkpoints and feedback loops: Workflow 1 gates merge on 'Run kill_switch_audit.py — must pass before merge' and 'Deploy at 0%; verify kill switch works' with 'abort if abort criteria met'; Workflow 2 (a destructive batch operation — deleting flags and branches) includes confirm-100%-or-killed checks, owner sign-off, and a re-run audit ('should now show one fewer flag'); Workflow 4 requires testing the kill switch in staging before production. The destructive/batch cap at 3 does not apply because validation is present, matching the level-5 anchor with error-recovery loops.

Progressive Disclosure

Verified against the actual bundle: all four referenced files exist (references/flag_taxonomy.md, provider_comparison.md, rollout_strategies.md, flag_lifecycle.md), all three scripts exist, and the asset template exists; references are one level deep with no further nesting found in the reference files themselves. Inline signals ('See references/flag_taxonomy.md for decision tree') plus a consolidated References section make navigation easy, matching the level-5 anchor. The only unverifiable claim (/flag-cleanup) is scored under actionability, not structure.

Specificity

Concrete actions are explicit and comprehensive: 'adding, retiring, or auditing feature flags' plus the full bundle inventory — 'Ships flag debt scanner, rollout planner, and kill-switch auditor (all stdlib Python), 4 references on flag taxonomy + provider trade-offs + rollout strategies + lifecycle, plus a /flag-cleanup slash command.' This matches the level-5 anchor (multiple specific concrete actions, comprehensive coverage) and exceeds level 4's 'minor gaps in coverage' since every bundle component is named. Third-person voice ('Ships') is used, so no voice penalty applies.

Completeness

Both questions are explicitly answered with concrete trigger phrases: what it does ('Ships flag debt scanner, rollout planner, and kill-switch auditor... 4 references... plus a /flag-cleanup slash command') and when to use it ('Use when adding, retiring, or auditing feature flags. Triggers on...'). This is a direct match to the level-5 anchor and its exemplar; it is not level 4 because the 'when' clause is fully explicit with specific trigger phrases rather than improvable.

Trigger Term Quality

Natural phrases users would actually say are comprehensively covered: 'add a flag', 'ship behind a flag', 'rollout plan', 'kill switch', 'stale flags', 'flag debt', plus the five product names (LaunchDarkly, GrowthBook, Statsig, Unleash, Flipt) and the domain term 'progressive-delivery'. Matches the level-5 anchor (comprehensive coverage including synonyms); no common variation of how a user would request flag work is missing.

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

The niche is distinct — no other plausible skill triggers on flag debt, kill switches, rollout plans, or named flag providers — so conflict risk with generic release-engineering or CI skills is minimal. Matches the level-5 'clear niche with distinct triggers' anchor; level 4's 'minor overlap risk' does not apply since none of the trigger terms naturally lead to a different skill.