Conciseness

The body is dense with non-obvious, platform-specific facts (auth paths, endpoint semantics, evidenceSet ID discovery) and contains almost no generic explanation Claude already knows. Not a 5: the base-URL selection logic in Configuration is explained three times (table, curl block, then the five 'Takeaways for agents' points), which is more than a minor trim candidate — but not the 'several padded sections' of a 3.

Actionability

Every step ships copy-paste-ready curl commands with realistic JSON payloads, environment variables, and an executable conditional-auth idiom ('${TOKEN:+-H "Authorization: Bearer $TOKEN"}'). The common cases — create bundle, attach ModelVersion/Report, submit evidence, publish approval, create/close finding — are all covered with concrete code, matching 'fully executable; copy-paste ready'.

Workflow Clarity

The 8-step workflow has a clear sequence with explicit validation checkpoints and feedback loops: try each base 'until GET $BASE/policy-overviews returns HTTP 200', 'Re-fetch the bundle and verify stage ... changed before continuing', and poll 'GET /results/latest?bundleID={bundleId} until ... isLatest: true'. This matches the anchor-5 pattern of sequence plus explicit validation with retry loops.

Progressive Disclosure

Good structure: twelve workflow files are each listed with a one-line purpose under 'Related Documentation' and re-linked at their point of use, and the 'Known platform behaviors' table routes gotchas to files — all one level deep and clearly signaled. Not a 5: the inline 8-step section explicitly overlaps the workflow files ('open the matching workflow file first instead of re-deriving from the 8-step section below'), and the ~290-line body carries a full endpoint table plus workflow that is partially duplicated in the referenced files.

Specificity

The description lists multiple concrete actions — 'creating governance bundles, attaching model artifacts and MLflow results as evidence, progressing through policy stages, and documenting findings' — which comprehensively covers the bundle lifecycle. It matches the anchor 'Lists multiple specific concrete actions; comprehensive coverage'; a 4 would require minor coverage gaps, but create/attach/progress/document spans the whole workflow.

Completeness

Both questions are explicitly answered: the first two sentences state what the skill does, and 'Use when the user mentions governance, compliance, bundles, policies, ... SR 11-7, NIST AI RMF, or audit trails' gives concrete trigger phrases. This matches the anchor-5 example structure exactly; a 4 would need a vaguer or less explicit 'when' clause.

Trigger Term Quality

Triggers include natural domain terms ('governance, compliance, bundles, policies, model risk management, SR 11-7, NIST AI RMF, audit trails') plus framework names users would actually say. Not a 5: common synonyms like 'model validation', 'regulatory', 'recertification', or 'approval' are missing, but coverage is otherwise good.

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

The niche is clear and distinct — Domino model risk governance with framework-specific triggers (SR 11-7, NIST AI RMF) that no generic skill would claim. 'Compliance' and 'governance' alone are broad, but they are anchored to the Domino/model-risk domain, keeping conflict risk minimal.