Conciseness

The body is short and dense with no padding and no explanation of concepts Claude already knows, matching 'efficient; minor instances of over-explanation that could be trimmed'. Not a 5 because machine-style declarations like 'hard_stop = WAIT | STOP_TURN | menu | gate | opener | approval | dispatch_gate | terminal_shape' and the AskUserQuestion disambiguation spend tokens on cryptic harness bookkeeping.

Actionability

There is concrete guidance in the form of explicit LOAD targets and traversal rules ('ALWAYS traverse declared steps/units in order', 'evaluate conditional gates and load every active branch'), but the pdsl block is pseudocode with an unresolved placeholder path ({cf-studio-path}) and no executable commands — matching 'some concrete guidance but incomplete; pseudocode instead of executable code; missing key details'. Not a 4 because all substantive work is delegated to files that ship outside this skill bundle.

Workflow Clarity

A sequence is present (run RequiredBootstrap, then load change-impact-analysis.md as the controlling protocol, then traverse its steps and gates) plus a stop condition ('ALWAYS stop if any required fragment or rule cannot be followed'), but checkpoints and validation are only implicit and actual step clarity depends entirely on the external protocol — matching 'steps listed but validation gaps; sequence present but checkpoints missing or implicit'.

Progressive Disclosure

The body is organized into units with rules and its references are one level deep and explicitly signaled, but no bundle files (references/, scripts/, assets/) ship with the skill and both referenced paths use the unresolvable {cf-studio-path} placeholder, so navigation to the real content is blocked — matching 'some structure but could be better organized'. Not a 4 because the skill carries none of its own substantive content and its pointers cannot be followed as written.

Specificity

Names the domain (SDLC artifact change impact analysis) and one concrete action — "analyzing the impact of an upstream artifact change ... on downstream artifacts and code" — but lists no other actions or outputs, matching the 'names domain and 1-2 concrete actions, but not comprehensive' anchor. It is not a 4 because only a single action is described rather than several specific ones.

Completeness

Both are present: an explicit when-clause ("Invoke when the user intent is analyzing the impact of ...") and a what (impact analysis of upstream changes on downstream artifacts and code). Not a 5 because the 'what' is embedded in the trigger clause and the skill's actual outputs/actions when invoked are never stated.

Trigger Term Quality

Good natural keyword coverage: "analyzing the impact", "upstream artifact change", "downstream artifacts and code", plus the artifact enumeration "PRD/ADR/DESIGN/DECOMPOSITION/FEATURE". It falls short of 5 because common synonyms users might say — "ripple effect", "affected", "blast radius", "traceability" — are absent.

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

A mostly distinct niche — SDLC change-impact analysis keyed to enumerated artifact types — with minor overlap risk against generic impact-analysis or code-review skills that also trigger on "impact" and "change". Not a 5 because those broad trigger words leave non-trivial collision potential.