Conciseness

Every line earns its place: document ID, URL, fetch instruction, fallback rule, and a write-back rule — no explanation of what Compose or React Native is, no padding. Matches the score-5 anchor ('assumes Claude's competence'); the 4 anchor's 'minor instances of over-explanation' do not apply.

Actionability

Concrete, executable guidance: 'Fetch the document with the Linear MCP get_document tool, using the ID above' and 'add it to the document with save_document using patch'. It falls short of the score-5 anchor because there are no examples — the patch payload format and what a 'matching section' looks like are unspecified, leaving minor gaps.

Workflow Clarity

A clear three-phase sequence (fetch doc → follow it for the whole port/audit, with an explicit stop-and-ask checkpoint if the MCP server is unavailable → save learnings back and tell the user). It sits at the score-4 anchor: sequence and an availability checkpoint are present, but mid-work validation is delegated entirely to the external doc and there is no end-of-work verification loop, so the score-5 anchor's 'explicit validation steps; feedback loops' is not fully met.

Progressive Disclosure

The body is a short, well-organized overview ('Before starting' / 'After finishing') pointing to one clearly signaled, one-level-deep reference — the Linear Best Practices document with both ID and URL — which is exactly where the bulk detail belongs. This matches the score-5 anchor ('clear overview with well-signaled one-level-deep references'); no bundle files exist to nest or bury.

Specificity

Concrete actions are named with precise scope: 'porting CDS React Native components to Jetpack Compose in packages/cds-android', 'auditing existing Android ports for completeness and quality', and 'Loads the CDS Compose Best Practices document from Linear'. Multiple specific actions with comprehensive coverage of the skill's port and audit scope; no vague filler, matching the score-5 anchor rather than the 4 anchor's 'minor gaps'.

Completeness

Explicitly answers both what ('Guide for porting... and for auditing existing Android ports') and when ('USE THIS whenever the user asks to port, migrate... or review whether a cds-android port is done correctly'), with concrete trigger phrases. This mirrors the score-5 anchor example structure; the 4 anchor's 'when could be more explicit' does not apply.

Trigger Term Quality

Trigger coverage is comprehensive with synonyms users would naturally say: 'port, migrate, or bring a CDS mobile/RN component to Android/Compose/Kotlin', plus explicit phrases like 'RN to Compose', 'mobile to Android CDS', 'port Button/Chip/Card to cds-android', 'public API boundary', 'does our Android Button match mobile'. Matches the score-5 anchor's synonym-rich coverage; not the 4 anchor, which expects 'a few natural terms missing'.

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

A clear niche (CDS RN-to-Compose in cds-android, the Linear Best Practices doc) with distinct triggers unlikely to fire for unrelated skills; the deliberate cross-reference to 'Load jetpack-best-practices alongside this skill' clarifies rather than blurs boundaries. Score-5 anchor fit; the 4 anchor's 'minor overlap risk with closely related skills' is not present since triggers are all CDS-specific.