Conciseness

The body is almost entirely project-specific knowledge Claude cannot infer (exact paths, diff examples, macro conventions) with no filler explaining known concepts, so it respects the token budget. It is not 5 because of minor redundancy: the four superpmi-shared files are listed twice (once as a bulleted group, then repeated one-by-one) and 'Go through each of them one by one' plus repeated path headers could be collapsed.

Actionability

Nearly every step gives exact file paths and copy-paste-ready diff examples for the common case, plus a concrete command (gen.sh/gen.bat), matching 'Mostly executable guidance; concrete code or commands with minor gaps'. It is not 5 because the agnostic.h step has no example diff and the lwmlist/enum entries use placeholders ('DLD', '<last value + 1>') rather than a fully concrete instance.

Workflow Clarity

Steps are explicitly numbered and declared 'must be completed in order', with placement notes and a Definition of Done self-check list covering all ten files — a clear sequence with most checkpoints present, matching the 4 anchor. It is not 5 because for a batch edit across ~10 C++/C# files there is no build/compile or gen.sh-output verification step to confirm correctness, i.e. no feedback loop; it stays above 3 because the DoD checklist and the step-4 instruction to inspect the auto-generated file provide explicit verification checkpoints.

Progressive Disclosure

The skill has no bundle files and uses clear section headers (Goal, Required inputs, Implementation steps, DoD) with a single self-contained procedure where every step is needed each run, so inline placement is appropriate and navigation is easy — 'Good structure; most content is appropriately placed... minor organization gaps'. It is not 5 because the ~50-line methodcontext.cpp example diff is long enough that it (or the SuperPMI step) could live in a reference file to keep SKILL.md a leaner overview.

Specificity

The description names the domain ("JIT-VM (aka JIT-EE) interface") and one concrete action ("Add a new API"), but does not enumerate the several supporting actions the skill actually covers (thunk generation, corinfo.h, SuperPMI plumbing). It clearly fits the anchor 'Names domain and 1-2 concrete actions, but not comprehensive' — below 4 because only a single action is listed, above 2 because the action and domain are concrete, not generic.

Completeness

There is a clear 'what' ("Add a new API to the JIT-VM (aka JIT-EE) interface in the codebase") but no 'Use when...' clause or equivalent trigger guidance, which per the judging guidelines caps completeness at 3. It is not 2 because the 'what' is specific and unambiguous; it cannot be 4 without any 'when' element at all.

Trigger Term Quality

It includes the relevant keywords "JIT-VM", "JIT-EE", "API", and "interface", covering the primary name variation via "(aka JIT-EE)", but misses natural phrases a user would likely say such as "corinfo", "JIT interface", "SuperPMI", or "ThunkInput". This matches 'Some relevant keywords but missing common variations or synonyms' rather than 4, since coverage beyond the dual name is absent.

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

The JIT-VM/JIT-EE interface is a narrow, well-defined niche with distinctive trigger terms unlikely to appear in requests for other skills, giving minimal conflict risk — matching the 'Clear niche with distinct triggers; minimal conflict risk' anchor. It is not below 5 because the domain terms are highly specific and no plausible overlap with other skills exists.