Conciseness

Dense and fact-only throughout — no padding or explanations of concepts Claude already knows (no 'what is ASO' prose). Minor trimmable redundancy: character limits (30/80/170/4,000) are stated in the Phase 1 field lists and again under 'Platform-Specific Rules — Key Facts,' and the promotional-text 170-char figure appears three times. Not 5 because that cross-section repetition could be consolidated into a single table.

Actionability

Concrete, executable guidance throughout: exact URL patterns ('apps.apple.com/{country}/app/{name}/id{digits}'), copy-paste search queries ('site:apps.apple.com "{app name}"'), exhaustive per-platform field-extraction lists, precise thresholds ('crash >1.09% or ANR >0.47% = reduced visibility'), a weighted scoring formula ('Final score = weighted sum, out of 100'), and a report rule mandating "'Change subtitle from X to Y' not 'Improve subtitle'" with character counts. Specific examples cover the common cases; no gaps for an instruction-only skill.

Workflow Clarity

Four phases are clearly sequenced (identify/fetch → tier classification → scoring → report), and each fragile step has an explicit fallback loop: 'If WebFetch returns incomplete data... note gaps and work with what's available,' 'If browser tools are unavailable, ask the user to share a screenshot,' and 'If you cannot confirm its presence, note this and recommend the user check App Store Connect.' The Common Issues Checklist and the pre-scoring brand-maturity calibration ('Before docking points, ask: Is this a mistake or a deliberate choice...') act as checkpoints. Not 4 because validation and fallback steps are explicit rather than implicit.

Progressive Disclosure

All five referenced files exist in references/ and are well-signaled at point of use with one-line descriptions ('references/apple-specs.md — Official Apple character limits, screenshot/video specs, CPP/PPO rules, rejection triggers'), and references are one level deep — no nested references inside the reference files. Not 5 because the body inlines ~50 lines of 'Key Facts' per platform that overlap the dedicated spec files — the 'key examples inline, bulk in separate file' pattern rather than a lean overview.

Specificity

The description names the domain clearly ('audit or optimize an App Store or Google Play listing') with two concrete action verbs, but never states what the skill actually does or produces — no mention of fetching live listing data, scoring six weighted dimensions, or generating a prioritized action plan. Matches 'names domain and 1-2 concrete actions, but not comprehensive'; not 4 because it does not list several distinct specific actions.

Completeness

Both sides are present: an explicit 'when' with concrete trigger phrases and a 'what' ('audit or optimize an App Store or Google Play listing'), but the what is thin — it does not convey the scored, multi-dimension, prioritized-report deliverable the skill produces. Not 5 because the what lacks concrete deliverables; not 3 because the when is emphatically explicit with concrete triggers rather than missing or weakly implied.

Trigger Term Quality

Ten natural quoted triggers ('ASO audit,' 'app store ranking,' 'why aren't people downloading my app,' 'improve my app conversion,' 'compare my app to competitors') plus a URL-sharing condition cover synonyms and colloquial variations across audit, visibility, ranking, conversion, keyword, and competitor intents. Comprehensive natural-term coverage; not 4 because the phrasing inventory is unusually complete for this domain.

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

Clear niche (mobile app store listings) with every trigger anchored to app-store context ('App Store or Google Play listing,' 'app store ranking,' 'app store optimization'), keeping it distinct from adjacent web-landing-page CRO or general marketing skills. Minimal conflict risk.