Conciseness

The body is dense reference material (tables, code blocks, a checklist) with no padding explaining concepts Claude already knows. Not 5 because of the dated model string "claude-3-5-haiku-20241022" in the frontmatter example — time-sensitive version info not placed in a deprecated section — and the workaround note that could be trimmed into the reference.

Actionability

Concrete file locations, copy-paste frontmatter blocks, and exact $ARGUMENTS/$1 syntax make the guidance mostly executable. Not 5 because the Bash-execution example is deliberately non-copy-pasteable ("EXCLAMATION`git branch --show-current`" — a justified bug workaround, but still not paste-ready) and the checklist item "Test with /command-name --help style invocation" is not a real slash-command behavior; not 3 because everything else is specific and complete.

Workflow Clarity

The task is simple (create a command file), the single action is unambiguous, and the closing checklist provides validation checkpoints. Not 5 because the checklist's test step is dubious and there is no explicit sequencing of decide-scope → write file → verify; not 3 because the checklist and per-scope location table give adequate checkpoints for this non-destructive task.

Progressive Disclosure

A single, clearly signaled, one-level-deep reference (./references/official-docs.md, verified to exist) with a well-organized overview body. Not 5 because the frontmatter options, arguments, dynamic content, and namespacing sections duplicate near-verbatim content in the reference file, so the split between overview and detail is not clean; not 3 because structure and navigation are otherwise good.

Specificity

The trigger quotes ("create a command", "write a slash command", "build a plugin command") name the domain clearly, but create/write/build/add are synonyms of a single action rather than distinct capabilities, and coverage of the topic (e.g., editing commands, namespacing, frontmatter) is not comprehensive. Not 4 because it does not list several specific distinct actions; not 2 because the domain is concrete, not generic.

Completeness

The "when" is explicit ("This skill should be used when the user asks to..."), but the "what" is never stated as a capability of the skill — it is only implied through the quoted user asks. Not 4 because a "what" clause (e.g., "Creates custom slash command Markdown files...") is absent; not 2 because the concrete trigger phrases strongly convey the domain and action.

Trigger Term Quality

Phrases like "create a command", "write a slash command", "build a plugin command", and "add custom commands to Claude Code" are natural things a user would say, with good synonym coverage across command/slash command/plugin command/custom command. Not 5 because common variations such as "make a new command" or "custom prompt" are missing.

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

The niche (Claude Code custom slash commands) is distinct, and "slash command" / "plugin command" / "custom commands to Claude Code" anchor it well. Not 5 because the bare phrase "create a command" could also match shell/CLI command or git alias creation requests; not 3 because the Claude Code qualifiers keep overlap minor.