Conciseness

The body is lean and directive throughout — phase instructions, a compact manifest template, the Iron Law, and the 3-Strike Rule all earn their tokens, with zero padding or explanation of concepts Claude already knows. Every token earns its place, matching the anchor for a maximally efficient skill.

Actionability

Mostly executable guidance: 'Fix in this EXACT order', 'Fix ONE issue at a time, run related test after each', 'Search entire codebase for imports from this feature', and concrete risk tiers (HIGH/MED/LOW with caller counts). A few directives remain abstract — 'search error logs' and 'check coverage' give no specifics on which logs or how — keeping it just below fully copy-paste-ready. Anchor 4.

Workflow Clarity

The 5-phase protocol is explicitly ordered ('Execute ALL 5 Phases IN ORDER') with genuine feedback loops: 'If a fix breaks something else → go back to DIAGNOSE', the 3-Strike Rule stop condition, the Iron Law gating fixes on completed diagnosis, and a dedicated VERIFY phase running the full test suite. This matches the anchor 'clear sequence with explicit validation steps; feedback loops for error recovery'.

Progressive Disclosure

Well-organized sections at ~86 lines with no monolithic content and one-level-deep 'Related Skills' pointers. Held at anchor 4 rather than 5 because the 'engineering/focused-fix — Full SKILL.md' pointer reads as an ambiguous self-reference and no bundle files exist to back the referenced detailed checklists and templates.

Specificity

Names the domain (feature/module repair) and scopes the action to 'all its files and dependencies', but enumerates no concrete actions such as mapping scope, tracing dependencies, diagnosing, or verifying. This matches the anchor 'names domain and 1-2 concrete actions, but not comprehensive', not level 4 which requires several specific listed actions.

Completeness

The 'what' is clear ('systematically fix an entire feature/module across all its files and dependencies') but there is no 'when' clause — 'Usage: /focused-fix <feature-path>' is syntax, not trigger guidance. Per the judging guidelines, a missing 'Use when...' clause or equivalent explicit trigger guidance caps completeness at 3.

Trigger Term Quality

Relevant keywords are present ('feature repair', 'fix', 'module', 'dependencies') but common natural variations users would actually say ('broken feature', 'fix this module', 'feature is broken across files') are missing, and 'Usage: /focused-fix <feature-path>' is invocation syntax rather than a trigger term. Fits anchor 3: some relevant keywords but missing common variations or synonyms.

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

'Deep-dive feature repair' carves a clear niche (repairing an entire feature/module) distinct from single-bug debugging skills, with only minor overlap risk against general debugging/refactoring skills. Not level 5 because the description lacks distinctive trigger phrases that would eliminate overlap entirely.