Conciseness

Efficient and dense with non-obvious domain knowledge (peer-dep pins, the "@dominodatalab/extensions-tools" alias rewrite, proxy-relative URL failure modes); it never explains concepts Claude already knows. Not 5 because a few spots could be trimmed: the "Applies to Domino 6.3 and Domino Cloud" line duplicates the frontmatter compatibility field, and the HashRouter and proxy-URL rationale sentences run long. Not 3 because nothing is padding — every section carries skill-specific information.

Actionability

Concrete, executable directives throughout: "Set `base: './'`", "build API URLs against `document.baseURI`", "Rewrite every such import to `@dominodatalab/extensions-tools`", exact version pins, and exact per-host file names (CLAUDE.md, .mcp.json, .codex/config.toml). Not 5 because the complete step-by-step procedures (scaffold, install, wiring commands) are delegated to reference files rather than shown, so the body alone leaves minor gaps for an instruction skill.

Workflow Clarity

Clear sequence — "Work Steps 1–13 in order" with steps mapped to reference files (1–7, 8–9, 10–11, 12–13), context-dependent entry rules, retrofit skip rules ("Retrofits skip Step 3… and Step 9"), and an explicit validation gate ("'Done' is gated by Step 12") plus signaled build-failure recovery. Not 5 because the actual checkpoint commands and hand-off checklist live in the referenced files rather than being explicit here.

Progressive Disclosure

The in-body structure matches the top anchor — a concise overview with four clearly signaled, one-level-deep references, each annotated with its step range and scope (e.g. "[SETUP-STEPS.md](./SETUP-STEPS.md) — Steps 1–7: …"). However, none of the four referenced files (SETUP-STEPS.md, APP-SOURCE.md, PROJECT-FILES.md, VERIFY.md) exist in the bundle, so the content they hold — the entire Steps 1–13 procedure — is missing as shipped and the navigation structure cannot be verified. Not 2 because the body itself is well-organized, not a monolith; not 4/5 because 'content appropriately split' fails when the split targets are absent.

Specificity

Lists multiple concrete actions with comprehensive coverage: "Bootstrap or retrofit a Vite + React 18 + TypeScript project", "Handles React 18 / react-router 5 pinning, Storybook MCP registration, theme provider wiring, and build verification". Not 4 because there are no coverage gaps — the actions enumerate the skill's full surface including pinning, MCP registration, theming, and verification.

Completeness

Explicitly answers both: what ("Bootstrap or retrofit a Vite + React 18 + TypeScript project so it uses the Domino design system") and when ("Use whenever the user wants to create, scaffold, refactor, retrofit, or set up such an SPA…") with concrete trigger phrases. Not 4 because the 'when' clause is explicit and specific rather than merely present.

Trigger Term Quality

Comprehensive natural terms and synonyms: "create, scaffold, refactor, retrofit, or set up", "React app, web app, frontend, UI, or extension", "look like Domino", "Domino-styled", plus pasted identifiers users would actually mention ("DominoThemeProviderDecorator, extensions-tools, or base-components without saying 'Domino'"). Not 4 because both common phrasings and technical synonyms are covered exhaustively.

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

Clear niche with distinct Domino-specific triggers and explicit conflict-avoidance scoping: "Scoped to a fully standalone SPA frontend for a Domino application or extension, not snippets, library additions, or work inside an existing Domino monorepo package". Not 4 because the boundaries against adjacent skills are stated explicitly, not just implied by specificity.