Conciseness

The body is lean with no padding and no explanations of concepts Claude already knows; the four-line placeholder status note ("Status: placeholder... the full skill body still needs to be written") is honest meta-information, and every other section adds guidance. It is not anchor 4 because there is no over-explanation to trim at all.

Actionability

There is real concrete guidance — the four-part layout ("Overview — A short summary card", "Table of contents", "Body sections", "References"), the enumerated primitives (cards, code blocks, DAG/mermaid diagrams, callouts, tables), and exact prerequisite paths — but no examples, commands, or component usage snippets, and the body self-describes as "a starting outline" to be refined. This matches anchor 3 (some concrete guidance but incomplete) rather than anchor 4's mostly-executable guidance.

Workflow Clarity

The sequence exists but is only implied by section order (Prerequisites -> Gather -> Plan -> Render -> Tone) with no explicit checkpoints; validation is delegated to a "self-check" living in the referenced canvas SKILL.md. This fits anchor 3 (sequence present but checkpoints missing or implicit), not anchor 4, which requires most checkpoints present. The skill is not destructive or batch, so no cap applies.

Progressive Disclosure

The body is under 50 lines, well organized into clear sections, and its only references (~/.cursor/skills-cursor/canvas/SKILL.md and sdk/index.d.ts) are one level deep and clearly signaled with full paths. Per the rubric's simple-skill guideline, well-organized sections with no need for external bundle files score 5; the skill bundle contains no references/, scripts/, or assets/ directories to over- or under-structure.

Specificity

"Render a documentation-style Cursor Canvas that organizes architecture notes, API references, walkthroughs, and how-tos into a navigable layout with sections, tables of contents, and cross-references" lists several concrete actions in third person. It sits between anchors 4 and 5: coverage is strong but the action list centers on one primary verb with supporting features rather than the multiple distinct comprehensive actions of the anchor-5 example.

Completeness

It explicitly answers what ("Render a documentation-style Cursor Canvas that organizes... with sections, tables of contents, and cross-references") and when ("Use when the user asks for...") with concrete trigger phrases, matching the anchor-5 example structure exactly.

Trigger Term Quality

"Use when the user asks for a docs canvas, documentation overview, architecture walkthrough, API reference page, or wants to render structured documentation as an interactive canvas" provides five natural trigger phrases with synonyms (docs/documentation, canvas/interactive canvas); no file extensions exist in this domain to include, so the anchor-5 coverage bar is met rather than the 'a few natural terms missing' of anchor 4.

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

"Cursor Canvas" carves a clear niche with distinct triggers, but phrases like "documentation overview" and "API reference page" carry minor overlap risk with plain documentation-writing requests or sibling canvas skills, fitting anchor 4 rather than the minimal-conflict anchor 5.