Conciseness

Every section earns its place: a 5-step procedure, a 7-row decision table, and four subject rules — no explanations of concepts Claude already knows and no padding. This matches the level-5 'lean and efficient' anchor; the level-4 anchor would require over-explanation that could be trimmed, and none is present.

Actionability

Fully executable guidance: the exact command 'git diff --cached', the message template '<type>(<optional scope>): <subject>', a decision table with concrete criteria (e.g., 'Adds behavior a user or caller can now use. Empty files and stubs don't count'), and precise subject rules. Per the scoring notes, an instruction-only skill with this level of concrete guidance merits the top anchor.

Workflow Clarity

A clear, well-sequenced 5-step workflow with an explicit safety note ('Do not commit, just suggest it to the user'), but no validation checkpoint (e.g., verify the subject fits 72 characters including the type prefix, or confirm the chosen type covers all staged files). This sits between the level-4 'minor validation gaps' and level-5 'explicit validation steps' anchors; since the operation is non-destructive the hard cap does not apply, but the missing checkpoint keeps it at 4 rather than 5.

Progressive Disclosure

This is a sub-50-line, single-purpose skill with no bundle files and no need for external references; the body is well-organized into clearly headed sections ('When you're triggered', 'What to do', 'Type table', 'Subject line rules'). Per the rubric's simple-skill guidance, that merits the top score.

Specificity

Multiple concrete, specific actions are listed — 'Reads the staged diff', 'picks the Conventional Commits type (feat, fix, refactor, docs, test, perf, chore)', 'writes an imperative subject of at most 72 characters, adding a body only for breaking changes, migrations or security fixes' — with concrete constraints rather than generic verbs. This matches the top anchor for comprehensive, concrete coverage; the level-4 anchor would imply gaps in coverage, but the description covers read, classify, write, and body-policy.

Completeness

It explicitly answers both questions: what ('Reads the staged diff, picks the Conventional Commits type... and writes an imperative subject of at most 72 characters') and when ('Use when the user asks for a commit message or wants help summarizing staged changes, e.g. "write a commit"'), with concrete example trigger phrases. This is a direct match to the level-5 anchor; the level-4 anchor would require the 'when' to be less explicit, which it is not.

Trigger Term Quality

Natural phrases users would actually say are present — 'commit message', 'git commit message', 'write a commit', 'summarizing staged changes' — giving good coverage. Falls short of the level-5 anchor's comprehensive synonym coverage (e.g., 'make a commit', 'commit these changes', 'finish the commit') which could be added as variations.

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

A clear niche — Conventional Commits message drafting for staged changes — with distinct triggers that would not fire for general git help or other skills. Minimal overlap risk; matches the level-5 anchor of a clear niche with distinct triggers.