Conciseness

"Given an account (or account group), entity, and period, produce a roll-forward that ties beginning to ending" — the ~30-line body assumes Claude's competence, never explaining what a roll-forward or GL is, and every line is instructional. Lean and efficient; every token earns its place.

Actionability

Concrete, executable guidance throughout: an exact schedule template, per-line tie sources ("a GL query (account + date range + journal-source filter) via the internal-gl MCP"), the explicit foot formula "X + A + B − C − D + E + F = Y", and a defined output format with a ties-to column. Not 5 because there is no worked example or literal sample GL query to copy — a minor gap versus 'specific examples cover the common cases'.

Workflow Clarity

The sequence is unambiguous (pull beginning, query each activity line, pull ending, assemble, foot-check, output) and there is an explicit validation checkpoint with error handling: "The schedule must foot: X + A + B − C − D + E + F = Y. If it doesn't, the gap is an unexplained item — surface it, don't plug it." This matches the simple-skill exception (single unambiguous deliverable with explicit validation), and the operation is read-only so the destructive/batch cap does not apply.

Progressive Disclosure

The skill is under 50 lines with no need for external references (none referenced, and no bundle files exist), organized into clear Structure / Tie each line / Output sections. Per the rubric's short-skill guidance, this warrants a 5.

Specificity

"Build a roll-forward schedule for a balance-sheet account — beginning balance plus activity less reversals equals ending balance, with each component tied to GL" lists several concrete, domain-anchored actions (build schedule, apply the equation, tie each component to GL). Falls short of the 5 anchor (comprehensive multi-action coverage) because it describes a single deliverable without enumerating variations or edge actions; clearly above the 3 anchor's '1-2 concrete actions'.

Completeness

The what is explicit ("Build a roll-forward schedule... with each component tied to GL") and the when is explicit ("Use for month-end close packages and audit support"), matching the anchor for both present but when could be more specific. Not 5 because the when-clause names contexts rather than concrete user-mention triggers (e.g., 'when the user asks for a roll-forward or account reconciliation').

Trigger Term Quality

Includes natural phrases an accounting user would actually say: "roll-forward schedule", "balance-sheet account", "GL", "month-end close", "audit support". A few natural terms are missing (e.g., "reconciliation", "tie-out", "flux analysis"), which keeps it below the comprehensive 5 anchor.

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

"roll-forward schedule" for a "balance-sheet account" in the month-end close / audit context is a clear niche with distinct triggers; 'roll-forward' is an unambiguous accounting term with minimal conflict risk against other skills.