Conciseness

The body is dense and assumes competence — no space is spent explaining what React, CDF, or graph rendering are, and the code example and dependency table are tight. Minor trimming is possible: version-deferral guidance appears twice ('Reuse the React version already pinned by the app' in step 2 and 'if the target app already pins different versions, defer to the app' under Dependencies), and a few dependency-purpose cells restate the obvious. That matches the level-4 anchor 'efficient; minor instances of over-explanation' rather than level 5's every-token-earns-its-place, and it is clearly above level 3's noticeable unnecessary explanation.

Actionability

The guidance is fully executable: a copy-paste install command with concrete versions, an exact copy source and destination layout, a complete runnable React component (useGraphViewer call, loading/error handling, explicit-height container), and named config knobs (whitelistedRelationProps, initialConnectionLimit, maxNodes, coreReverseQueries) with the exact tuple shape. This matches the level-5 anchor 'fully executable; copy-paste ready code or commands; specific examples cover the common cases'.

Workflow Clarity

The six integration steps are strictly ordered with an explicit validation step ('Run typecheck and build... and fix any path or type issues introduced by the copy') that forms a validate-and-fix feedback loop, reinforced by a final seven-item Verification Checklist. This matches the level-5 anchor 'clear sequence with explicit validation steps; feedback loops for error recovery; checklists'. The copy operation is not destructive or batch-risky, so the level-3 cap does not apply.

Progressive Disclosure

The body is an overview that defers detail one level deep with clear signals — 'read code/README.md' for full configuration/return-value/layout/theming docs and 'inspect the source files under code/' for implementation. However, no bundle files are present to verify (no code/, references/, scripts/, or assets/ in the skill directory), and the paths are inconsistent ('skills/graph-viewer/code/', 'code/README.md', 'code/'), a minor organization gap that keeps it at level 4 rather than level 5's clean, well-signaled reference structure.

Specificity

The description names the domain ('CDF graph viewer', 'Flows app') and one concrete action — 'Integrate... by copying the local code bundle' — but offers only that single integration action, matching the anchor 'names domain and 1-2 concrete actions, but not comprehensive'. It does not list several distinct actions as the level-4 anchor requires, and it is not so thin as to fall to level 2, which demands merely generic actions.

Completeness

Both questions are explicitly answered with concrete trigger phrases: what — 'Integrate the reusable CDF graph viewer (useGraphViewer) into a Flows app by copying the local code bundle'; when — 'Use when embedding a graph visualization, adding a knowledge graph, or showing CDF data model relationships and instances'. This matches the level-5 anchor exactly; level 4 would require the 'when' clause to be less explicit, which it is not.

Trigger Term Quality

Natural trigger phrases are present and varied — 'embedding a graph visualization', 'adding a knowledge graph', 'showing CDF data model relationships and instances' — giving good keyword coverage. A few natural variations users might say are missing (e.g. 'network graph', 'node graph', 'graph view', 'explore data model'), so it fits the level-4 anchor rather than the comprehensive synonym coverage of level 5, while clearly exceeding the partial coverage of level 3.

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

Terms like 'CDF', 'Flows app', 'useGraphViewer', and 'data model relationships and instances' carve out a clear niche, but the triggers 'embedding a graph visualization' and 'adding a knowledge graph' are broad enough to fire for non-CDF graph requests that the skill explicitly excludes. That is exactly the level-4 anchor ('mostly distinct; minor overlap risk with closely related skills') rather than level 5's minimal conflict risk, and far more distinct than level 3's generic overlap.