Conciseness

The body is uniformly imperative and operational (e.g. "Never overwrite an existing file", "Loading is read-only: do not edit any file") with zero explanation of concepts Claude already knows; it even explicitly avoids duplicating the completeness contract ("satisfy that contract without redefining the required-section set here"). Every token earns its place, matching the 'Lean and efficient' anchor.

Actionability

Guidance is fully concrete: exact commands ("git status, git diff, and git diff --cached"), exact path schemes with worked examples ("context/handovers/{plan_name}-{task_id}.md ... (for example T01)", "$sce-handover context/handovers/2026-08-24-session.md"), explicit reject rules for the loader, and named output layouts. An instruction-only skill, its guidance is copy-paste actionable throughout, matching the top anchor.

Workflow Clarity

Both paths are cleanly sequenced with numbered steps and strong validation gates — input-mode validation, path rejection rules, context-root check before writing, completeness validation "before reporting success", and explicit blocked/stop states. It falls short of 5 because writer step 5 says to validate the written file but defines no recovery action if that validation fails (no fix-and-revalidate loop), a minor validation gap per the 'most checkpoints present' anchor.

Progressive Disclosure

The body keeps the workflow while the persisted schema (references/handover-template.md) and all output layouts (references/output.md) are split into real, clearly signaled, one-level-deep bundle files — both verified to exist. Structure matches 'Clear overview with well-signaled one-level-deep references; content appropriately split'.

Specificity

"Write a session handover document, or load one for continuation" names the domain and exactly two concrete actions (write, load), but says nothing about the document's content, location, or structure. This matches the anchor 'Names domain and 1-2 concrete actions, but not comprehensive'; it falls short of 4 because it does not list several specific actions.

Completeness

The "what" is clear (write or load a session handover document), but there is no "Use when..." or equivalent trigger clause; "for continuation" only weakly implies when to invoke it. The rubric guideline explicitly caps a missing 'Use when...' clause at 3.

Trigger Term Quality

"session handover" and "continuation" are natural terms a user might say, but the description omits common variations and synonyms such as "handoff", "session summary", "resume", or "context transfer". This fits 'Some relevant keywords but missing common variations or synonyms' rather than 4's 'good keyword coverage'.

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

"Session handover" is a fairly specific niche (persisting/loading session continuity state), mostly distinct with only minor overlap risk against generic note-taking or summarization skills. It does not reach 5 because the short description offers no distinct trigger phrasing to fully disambiguate it from adjacent session-summary skills.