Conciseness

The body is mostly efficient with no concept-explaining padding, but it could be tightened: 'Copy-Paste Prompts' lists five near-identical prompt blocks where one exemplar would do, routing information appears in both 'Default Workflow Routing' and the prompt examples, and the installer sub-block in step 4 ('Review the exact skill IDs and their support files before installation...') is dense and repetitive with the referenced handoff. This fits anchor 3 rather than 2, since there are only some padded spots, not several unnecessary explanations.

Actionability

Concrete, executable guidance throughout: an explicit routing table ('Product delivery request -> `ship-saas-mvp`'), ordered source-of-truth reading, a defined step sequence with per-step artifacts, and an installer dry-run procedure backed by a real copy-paste command in the referenced handoff. As an instruction-only skill this is actionable with only minor gaps (e.g. no example of announcing a step or its expected artifact), fitting anchor 4 rather than 5.

Workflow Clarity

The multi-step process is clearly sequenced with explicit validation checkpoints and feedback loops: 'Verify completion criteria before moving to next step', the retain-failure → fix → rerun loop, exact blocked-step reporting, and the installer loop where 'If preview fails, correct the ID, release, prerequisite or destination and preview again. A failed preview never authorizes installation.' This matches anchor 5 (explicit validation steps with error-recovery feedback loops) and exceeds anchor 4's 'most checkpoints'.

Progressive Disclosure

The body is a well-sectioned overview that keeps detail one level deep in the bundled references/workflow-cards.md (verified to exist, linked with descriptive context, and the #reviewed-selection-handoff anchor is real). External repo paths are clearly flagged as belonging to the AAS repository with an explicit bundled fallback, matching anchor 5's clear overview with well-signaled one-level-deep references.

Specificity

Phrases like 'ship a SaaS MVP', 'audit application security', and 'run browser QA' name concrete scenarios, but the skill's own actions are only implied by the fragment 'with multiple skills and verified checkpoints' — it never states what the skill does (orchestrate a sequence of skill invocations). This matches anchor 3 (concrete but not comprehensive) rather than 4, and is clearly above anchor 2 since the scenarios are specific rather than generic.

Completeness

The when-clause is explicit and strong ('Use when asked to...'), so the missing-Use-when cap does not apply; the what is present but weak ('with multiple skills and verified checkpoints' implies orchestration without stating it). The strong when exceeds anchor 3's expectation while the weak what falls short of anchor 4's clear what — between anchors, noticeably above the midpoint, so 4.

Trigger Term Quality

The description uses natural phrases a user would actually say ('ship a SaaS MVP', 'build an AI agent', 'run browser QA', 'design a domain model') covering all five scenarios. It falls short of anchor 5 because common synonyms and variations ('E2E testing', 'security review/pentest', 'DDD', 'web app') are missing, but coverage clearly exceeds anchor 3.

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

The five triggers overlap substantially with the dedicated component skills it routes to — a request to 'build an AI agent' or 'audit application security' could just as naturally match a direct agent-building or security-audit skill, and nothing in the description signals it is an orchestrator. This fits anchor 3 (specific but overlapping with similar skills) rather than 4, where overlap would be minor.