Conciseness

The body is dense, table-heavy, and free of concept explanations Claude already knows, but the read-only boundary is restated four-plus times ("verdict producer, never a mutator", "The caller applies the edit; this unit only reports", "it consumes only caller-context signals", plus the description itself), and "Policy rules enforced today" repeats the "variable-driven fails open" caveat per rule. Not 5 because this repetition could be trimmed; not 3 because there is no filler — every section carries contract information.

Actionability

The gate invocation is copy-paste ready (python3 "$PLUGIN_ROOT/.../validate-terraform-policy.py" "$TERRAFORM_DIR" --json "$VERDICT_PATH") with each parameter's ownership documented, the exit-code table maps every outcome to a concrete caller action, and the verdict JSON shape plus a runnable pytest verification command are given. Fully executable guidance for both touchpoints.

Workflow Clarity

The two-touchpoint flow (posture rules before writing, policy gate after) is sequenced via an explicit routing table, and the exit-code section defines a concrete feedback loop: exit 1 → "read violations[], edit the named .tf sites, re-run (caller's retry budget)". Validation checkpoints are explicit and a Verification section with a runnable test command closes the loop.

Progressive Disclosure

Structure is strong: a context-keyed routing table points to the two real one-level-deep references (security-posture-rules.md with its cited "Caller-context signals" anchor present, terraform-validation.md with the fmt→init→validate→policy protocol), and the fixtures path is real per the test script. Not 5 because the ~60-line "Policy rules enforced today" catalog with per-attribute fail-open semantics partially duplicates the gate-enforced sections of references/security-posture-rules.md and reads like detail-level content that could live in the reference with only a rule-name summary inline.

Specificity

Multiple concrete capabilities are named — "Best-practice authoring guidance AND a read-only policy gate", "reports whether the generated Terraform passes", "never edits .tf files", "never touches .phase-status.json" — plus an explicit complement boundary against "terraform fmt/init/validate". Coverage of what the unit does and does not do is comprehensive; not score 4 because there are no noticeable gaps in the action inventory.

Completeness

The what is explicit ("authoring guidance AND a read-only policy gate") and the when is explicit with concrete trigger phrasing ("Load during any phase that writes a terraform/ directory — first as ... then after writing as the deterministic policy verdict"). Both halves are answered clearly; no ambiguity to push it down to 4.

Trigger Term Quality

Good natural coverage: "AWS Terraform", "Terraform", ".tf files", "terraform/ directory", "best-practice", "policy gate", "security-baseline". Missing common synonyms like "IaC" or "infrastructure as code" and a plain "Terraform security review" phrasing; not score 5 because synonym coverage is incomplete, and not 3 because the core terms a caller would use are all present.

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

The niche is precise — read-only policy verdicts for AWS Terraform generated by a migration skill — and it explicitly distinguishes itself from adjacent tooling ("Complements (does not replace) terraform fmt/init/validate") and from the caller's own duties. Minimal overlap risk with a generic terraform skill; the read-only scoping removes ambiguity.