Conciseness

The body is lean and assumes competence: no explanation of what LinkedIn is, no library tutorials, no padded prose. Every section carries non-obvious judgment (e.g., "a positioning that excludes nothing is availability", "60% of the budget belongs in other people's comment sections") rather than restating common knowledge. ~85 lines covering three workflows, three scripts, three references, and two assets with no filler.

Actionability

All three steps give copy-paste-ready commands with real flags (e.g., `python3 scripts/cadence_planner.py --minutes 240 --stage starting --target-posts 3 --output human`), and the exit-code contract is stated ("Exit 0 fits / 2 below the 90-minute floor / 3 over budget"). Concrete numeric thresholds (90-minute floor, 150-follower floor, two-to-four pillars, 12-issue arc) make the guidance fully executable.

Workflow Clarity

The sequence is explicit and ordered ("Three decisions, in this order. Out of order is why most LinkedIn efforts...") with each step numbered and titled. Validation checkpoints are built in as refusing validators with documented exit codes, giving validate/refuse/rework feedback loops; the "Distinct From" section adds routing guidance for adjacent skills.

Progressive Disclosure

The body is a true overview: each workflow keeps only decision logic inline while detail lives in verified one-level-deep bundle files — three scripts (each linked with a role summary), three references (each annotated with its topic and source count), and two assets (fillable template, passing example). All referenced paths exist on disk and every link is clearly signaled; nothing that belongs in a reference file is inlined.

Specificity

Multiple concrete actions are explicitly named in third person: "Validates the positioning brief", "sizes the week against real hours", "refuses a plan that will not survive week five", and "gates a newsletter against eligibility and a six-month cadence commitment". Coverage spans all three of the skill's decisions (brief, cadence, newsletter) with no generic filler.

Completeness

Both questions are answered explicitly: "what" via the named validation/sizing/gating actions and the scope statement "a LinkedIn plan rather than a post", and "when" via the "Use when" opening clause plus a dedicated "Triggers on" list with concrete phrases. This matches the 5-anchor exemplar structure.

Trigger Term Quality

Natural user phrasings are quoted directly: "what should I post about", "how often should I post", "should I start a LinkedIn newsletter", "grow my following", "90-day plan", plus domain synonyms (content pillars, posting cadence, thought leadership). These are exactly the phrases a user would say when needing this skill.

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

A clear niche is staked out — strategy (pillars, cadence, newsletter decision) rather than drafting posts or reading analytics — and the "rather than a post" clause actively disambiguates from adjacent post-writing skills. Trigger phrases like "should I start a LinkedIn newsletter" are unlikely to fire for the wrong skill.