The ~290-line body is mostly efficient but padded: the progress checklist appears twice (Step list and Quality checklist), and sections like 'Search best practices', 'Special considerations', and the promotional 'Next Step: Export Verified Content' add tokens that could be trimmed.

Provides concrete guidance — specific search-query patterns, a copy-paste comparison table and correction-report template, status codes, and an Edit-tool example — which is actionable for an instruction-oriented skill.

Five clearly sequenced steps with a tracking checklist, an explicit user-approval checkpoint before destructive edits, and post-edit verification ('Verify all edits were applied successfully') provide the feedback loops the rubric requires.

The skill is a single ~290-line file with no bundle references; it is well-organized into sections, but substantial inline content (examples, search practices, special considerations) that could be split into one-level-deep reference files keeps it from a 3.

Lists multiple concrete actions — 'Verifies factual claims', 'using web search and official sources', 'proposes corrections with user confirmation' — matching the anchor for several specific concrete actions.

Explicitly answers both what ('Verifies factual claims…then proposes corrections with user confirmation') and when ('Use when the user asks to fact-check…') with an explicit trigger clause.

Natural user-facing terms — 'fact-check, verify information, validate claims, check accuracy, or update outdated information' — give good coverage of phrasings a user would actually say.

A clear niche (verifying factual claims via web search with authoritative sources) with distinct triggers that are unlikely to fire for unrelated skills.