Conciseness

The body is dense and operational — routing rules, exact CLI/API names, REST paths, and a troubleshooting table with essentially no filler or explanation of concepts Claude already knows. It falls short of the 5 anchor because the MCP-vs-local 'Guardrail' section restates its point twice ('Do NOT file_read these paths locally — they do not exist on disk' followed by 'This distinction applies only to the skill's own packaged files') and could be trimmed by roughly half. Not 3, since padding is confined to one section rather than spread throughout.

Actionability

Concrete, executable guidance dominates: 'aws mwaa invoke-rest-api (paths /dags/{id}/dagRuns and /dags/{id}/dagRuns/{run_id}/taskInstances)', 'list-task-instances then get-task-instance to get each task's LogStream', and a verbatim output template. It stops short of the 5 anchor because no full copy-paste CLI invocations (with flags/parameters) appear in the body — commands are named, not shown end-to-end (details are deferred to the references).

Workflow Clarity

A clearly sequenced Step 0–4 spine with complexity-based routing, priority-ordered categorization ('infra, then drift, then code-data'), explicit error-recovery feedback loops ('If invoke-rest-api errors (RestApiClientException), fall back to the Scheduler and DAGProcessing log groups'), a troubleshooting table, and an exact structured output report. This matches the 5 anchor (clear sequence, feedback loops, checklists); the read-only destructive-operation cap does not apply since remediation is user-gated.

Progressive Disclosure

The body is a genuine overview that routes to three real reference files (verified: references/provisioned-diagnostics.md, serverless-diagnostics.md, and failure-catalog.md all exist), each signaled inline at its point of use ('See references/failure-catalog.md') and again in a References section with one-line descriptions. References are one level deep — no nested .md chains inside them (only an external AWS docs URL). This is the 5 anchor's clear overview with well-signaled one-level-deep references.

Specificity

The description names concrete actions ('Diagnoses and root-causes Amazon MWAA workflow failures'), specific APIs ('aws mwaa invoke-rest-api', 'GetWorkflowRun, ListWorkflowRuns, GetTaskInstance'), and comprehensively enumerates failure coverage ('failed runs and tasks, DAGs not appearing, import errors, worker OOM, IAM denials, and dependency drift'). Coverage is comprehensive with no meaningful gaps, matching the 5 anchor rather than the 4 anchor's 'minor gaps'.

Completeness

It explicitly answers both questions: what ('Diagnoses and root-causes Amazon MWAA workflow failures across Provisioned and Serverless environments' with tools and coverage) and when ('Triggers on: DAG failed, task failed, workflow run failed...'), with concrete trigger phrases — the exact pattern of the 5 anchor. Not 4, since the 'when' is fully explicit, not merely present.

Trigger Term Quality

Trigger phrases are extensive and natural ('DAG failed, task failed, workflow run failed, MWAA error, debug my DAG, why did my workflow fail, DAG not showing up, worker crashed'), covering synonyms well. However 'Airflow' — the word users most commonly pair with DAG failures ('my Airflow DAG failed', 'Airflow task failed') — and scheduler-related phrasings are missing, fitting the 4 anchor ('good keyword coverage; a few natural terms missing') rather than the 5 anchor's comprehensive synonym coverage.

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

Clear niche (MWAA failure diagnosis) with a negative boundary clause ('Not applicable to authoring workflows (handled by authoring-mwaa-workflow), running or smoke-testing a workflow (handled by testing-mwaa-workflow), or CI-CD deploy failures') that explicitly disambiguates sibling skills — minimal conflict risk, matching the 5 anchor. Not 4, because it does more than distinguish; it fences off named siblings by trigger condition.