Names the domain (A/B testing) and mentions some specific elements (hypothesis, metrics, execution readiness), but doesn't list concrete actions beyond 'setting up'. It describes structure rather than specific capabilities like 'define hypotheses, configure metrics, validate execution readiness'.

Describes what the skill does (structured guide for A/B test setup with gates) but has no explicit 'Use when...' clause or equivalent trigger guidance. Per the rubric, a missing 'Use when...' clause caps completeness at 2, and the 'what' itself is only moderately clear, so this scores at 1.

Includes 'A/B tests' which is a natural keyword, plus 'hypothesis' and 'metrics' which are relevant. However, it misses common variations like 'split test', 'experiment', 'variant testing', 'conversion testing', or 'experimentation'.

A/B testing is a reasonably specific niche, and the mention of 'mandatory gates' adds some distinctiveness. However, it could overlap with general experiment design or testing skills, and without explicit trigger terms it's not fully distinct.

The skill is reasonably structured but includes some unnecessary padding—motivational closing paragraphs ('A/B testing is not about proving ideas right...'), emoji section numbering, and the 'When to Use' / 'Limitations' boilerplate add little value. Several sections explain concepts Claude already understands (e.g., what A/B vs A/B/n vs MVT tests are). Could be tightened by ~30%.

The skill provides clear checklists and decision tables, which are actionable for a process-oriented skill. However, it lacks concrete examples—no sample hypothesis, no sample size calculation formula or tool command, no example metric definition. It describes what to do but rarely shows a worked example, keeping it at the 'incomplete guidance' level.

The multi-step process is clearly sequenced with explicit hard gates (Hypothesis Lock, Execution Readiness Gate) that block progression. Refusal conditions serve as validation checkpoints, and the 'During the Test' DO/DO NOT lists provide guardrails. The feedback loop of 'if assumptions are weak → warn → delay or redesign' is present. This is a well-structured gated workflow.

All content is inline in a single monolithic file with no references to supporting documents. For a skill of this length (~150+ lines), some sections like 'Test Type Selection,' 'Metrics Definition,' or 'Analysis Discipline' could be split into referenced files. The organization within the file is decent with clear headings, but there's no layered navigation.