Conciseness

The body is a lean imperative checklist with zero concept explanation; every line is operational (e.g. 'Do not assume `docs/ai`; it is only the default docs directory') and assumes Claude's competence, matching the every-token-earns-its-place anchor.

Actionability

Concrete, executable commands appear throughout (`npx ai-devkit@latest lint --feature <name>`, `init -a -e claude --built-in --yes`, `docs init-feature <name>`, `.ai-devkit.json` `paths.docs` fallback), but sibling skills (`dev-worktree`, `dev-planning`, `memory`, `task`) and 'the `README.md` template' are referenced by name without paths, leaving minor gaps.

Workflow Clarity

The phases are clearly sequenced with explicit validation gates: lint before phase work, a recovery path when lint fails (init then rerun), a hard gate ('Do not create, update, approve, or transition past requirements while material open questions remain'), restated shared understanding, and blocker/next-step reporting — matching the explicit-validation anchor.

Progressive Disclosure

The ~50-line body has no bundle files and is organized into three well-delineated sections, but cross-references to sibling skills and the requirements template are name-only and not clearly signaled paths, so structure is good with minor organization gaps rather than fully clear navigation.

Specificity

The what-clause 'Requirements phase guidance for starting features and reviewing requirements' names the domain but only 1-2 actions, which are themselves abstract ('guidance', 'starting features'); the concrete action verbs only appear in the when-clause, so it matches the anchor for domain plus 1-2 concrete actions rather than the several specific actions of level 4.

Completeness

Both parts are present — an explicit 'Use when the user wants to...' clause with concrete triggers and a stated what — but the what ('guidance for starting features and reviewing requirements') is vague where the level-5 anchor requires a clearly concrete what; it is above level 3 because the when is fully explicit.

Trigger Term Quality

'capture a new requirement, clarify product scope, initialize feature docs, review requirements' are phrases users would naturally say, but common synonyms like 'requirements gathering', 'write a spec', or 'PRD' are missing and 'run dev-lifecycle phases 1-2' is tool-internal jargon, fitting the good-coverage-with-a-few-gaps anchor.

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

Scoping to 'AI DevKit' and 'dev-lifecycle phases 1-2' carves out a clear niche with minimal conflict risk, though 'review requirements' could mildly overlap with sibling dev-lifecycle phases or generic review skills, matching the mostly-distinct anchor.