Conciseness

The body is dense and assumes competence — exit-code semantics, blocking-finding consequences, and rules are stated with no padding or explanation of known concepts. It falls short of anchor 5 only because the trailing "**Version:** 1.0.0" line duplicates frontmatter metadata, and the rubric penalizes time-sensitive version data outside a deprecation section.

Actionability

Three copy-paste-ready bash commands with real flags (format_picker with --goal/--material/--minutes, post_linter with --input/--has-image, and both repurpose_splitter invocations including --record/--posted-on) cover the common script cases, and exit codes are decoded into concrete decisions. It matches the fully-executable anchor; the only non-command step (drafting) is inherently judgment work and is backed by template assets.

Workflow Clarity

Five clearly sequenced steps with explicit validation checkpoints: the linter's exit 0/2/3 semantics, the stop condition ("exit 0 or a stated decision to accept a warning"), and the stated feedback loop ("Two passes is normal"). The repurposing step guards its batch risk with the reuse ledger and a record command, matching the validation-and-recovery anchor rather than the minor-gaps anchor 4.

Progressive Disclosure

The body is a lean overview with well-signaled one-level-deep references — four references, two assets, and three scripts, all verified to exist as real files, each annotated with a one-line purpose. Nothing that belongs in a bundle file is inlined, and navigation is trivial, matching the clear-overview anchor.

Specificity

The description lists multiple concrete actions in third person — "Lints posts 0-100 on mechanics, hook, integrity, and accessibility; picks the format the material actually supports; and splits long sources into standalone units with a reuse ledger" — with comprehensive coverage of write/edit/lint/repurpose and named post types (story, how-to, opinion, carousel, video, poll). It exceeds anchor 4 because there are no minor gaps in capability coverage and the actions are specific rather than generic.

Completeness

Both halves are explicit: "Use when someone wants to write, edit, or lint a LinkedIn post… or wants an article, talk, or transcript repurposed into posts" answers when with concrete trigger phrases, and the lint/format/split clauses answer what. It is not 4 because the 'when' is fully explicit with quoted triggers, not merely present.

Trigger Term Quality

It quotes natural user phrasings verbatim — "write a LinkedIn post", "is this hook any good", "review my post", "turn this into LinkedIn posts", "carousel", "what format should this be" — covering synonyms and informal variants a user would actually say. It matches the comprehensive-synonyms anchor rather than anchor 4 because no common variation is missing.

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

It claims a clear niche (LinkedIn posts specifically, including mechanics like the fold, carousels, and a reuse ledger) with distinct triggers, so overlap with generic copywriting or marketing skills is minimal. Not 4: the domain scoping leaves virtually no wrong-skill trigger risk.