Conciseness

The body is dense and project-specific throughout — the decision table, status-string rules, anti-pattern list, and worked example are all signal this project had to learn the hard way, and it assumes competence (never explains what a checkbox or Form is). The Apple HIG blockquotes ("Minimize the number of settings you offer...") are cited precedent load-bearing to the rules, not padding. It sits at 4 rather than 5 because minor trimming is possible: the Spotlight/Photos/iCloud/Alfred bullet list partly repeats the table row above it, and the four-item worked example runs long.

Actionability

For an instruction-only skill the guidance is unusually concrete: a seven-row problem→shape→precedent table, copy-ready status strings ("Can't reach your cloud board right now. Events are being kept and will be sent when it's back."), a named precedent for every rule, and a pre-ship checklist. Not 5 because some guidance stays abstract ("ask where the state changes a decision, and put it there") and the one concrete layout artifact is delegated to an external file ("components/specs/settings.html") with no inline example.

Workflow Clarity

There is a clear implicit sequence — the one rule, then shape selection, then status text, then structure, then anti-patterns as a check — and an explicit validation checkpoint: the "Before you ship a settings change" checklist. No destructive or batch operations are involved, so the workflow cap does not apply. Held at 4 rather than 5 because the procedure is never laid out as an explicit ordered workflow (the reader assembles it from section order), and the only error-recovery model is implicit in the worked example's four wrong answers.

Progressive Disclosure

This is a single-file skill with no bundle (no references/, scripts/, or assets/ exist), and the body is well-sectioned rather than a monolithic wall. The "Where the evidence lives" section gives one-level-deep, per-file pointers with a clear 'start here' (synthesis.md) and a description of each file's most reusable content — good navigation. Not 5: the detailed six-agent research is summarized inline across several sections (shape precedents, status text rules) that could sit in a reference file, and the pointed-to paths live outside the skill bundle, so the reference structure cannot be verified.

Specificity

Names the domain ("Apple-platform settings design for signalbox") and three concrete coverage areas: "which control shape fits which problem, what status text should say, and the anti-patterns this project keeps rediscovering." This matches the 4 anchor (several specific items, minor gaps) rather than 5, because the body also covers pane/tab structure and iOS-specific conventions that the description omits; it is well above 3, which expects only 1-2 concrete actions.

Completeness

Explicitly answers both questions: what ("which control shape fits which problem, what status text should say, and the anti-patterns") and when ("Use when adding or changing anything in the macOS Settings window, the iOS Settings tab, or any pane that pairs a control with live state"). The when-clause is concrete with specific trigger surfaces, matching the 5 anchor exactly; nothing below 5 fits since neither what nor when is weak or implied.

Trigger Term Quality

Natural phrases a user would say are present: "macOS Settings window", "iOS Settings tab", "pane that pairs a control with live state", "status text". Falls short of the 5 anchor because common synonyms are missing — notably "preferences" (the macOS idiom), "toggle", "checkbox", and "label" — which are all terms the body itself uses and a user would plausibly say.

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

The niche is pinned to one project and its named surfaces ("signalbox", "macOS Settings window", "iOS Settings tab"), so it would not fire for generic Apple HIG, UI-copy, or documentation skills. Clear niche with distinct triggers — the 5 anchor; even the 4 anchor's 'minor overlap risk' with closely related skills does not apply given the project-specific scoping.