Conciseness

Every line carries repo-specific information Claude could not know (surface-to-document maps, precedence rules, per-surface dev commands, install policy), and justifications are one clause long ('The table goes stale; the filesystem does not'). No padding or explanation of concepts Claude already knows was found, matching the 'lean and efficient; every token earns its place' anchor rather than the 'minor instances of over-explanation' anchor 4.

Actionability

Commands are copy-paste ready ('find . -name DESIGN.md -not -path */node_modules/*'', the per-surface 'bun run dev:*' table, 'bun run test:browser', 'bun add <pkg> --cwd <dir>') and the task-to-skill and surface-to-document tables cover the common cases exhaustively. The only non-literal instruction (Chrome MCP tool usage) names the tool family, which is sufficient for MCP invocation, so this fits the 'fully executable, covers common cases' anchor rather than anchor 4's 'minor gaps'.

Workflow Clarity

Four clearly sequenced steps culminate in an explicit validation stage with a fallback chain (rendered look via Chrome tools, else browser-test screenshots, else honest 'NOT RUN' with reason), plus 'run the gates AGENTS.md names and report their real output' and a closing report checklist. This matches the anchor-5 'explicit validation steps; checklists' rather than anchor 4, whose 'minor validation gaps' are absent; no destructive/batch-operation cap applies.

Progressive Disclosure

No bundle files exist (references/, scripts/, assets/ are absent), and the body is cleanly sectioned into four step headers with well-formed tables. The inlined tables are load-bearing routing data needed on every invocation, not content that belongs in a separate file, so this is not the 'content that should be separate is inline' case of anchors 2-3.

Specificity

It lists five concrete actions — 'Maps each frontend to the DESIGN.md or wiki page that governs its look', 'ranks that document above any design skill', 'says which design skill fits which task and which must never touch a surface with a design system', and 'how to show the result rendered' — covering the skill's entire workflow. This matches the comprehensive-coverage anchor 5 rather than anchor 4, since no capability is left unspecified.

Completeness

The 'when' is fully explicit with concrete trigger phrases ('Use before any change to how a screen looks in this repository — a new page or component, a layout, a redesign, or a one-line colour or spacing fix') and the 'what' is answered concretely by the enumerated actions. Both are explicit, matching anchor 5 rather than anchor 4 where the 'when' could be more specific.

Trigger Term Quality

Natural phrases are present — 'change to how a screen looks', 'a new page or component', 'a layout', 'a redesign', 'a one-line colour or spacing fix', 'UI work' — but common variations a user would say such as 'styling', 'CSS', 'theme', or 'look and feel' are missing. Good coverage with a few natural terms absent fits anchor 4 rather than the comprehensive-synonym anchor 5.

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

The description is scoped to 'this repository', DESIGN.md/wiki governance, and the designer and design-mechanic agents, giving it a clear niche that generic design skills do not occupy. Minimal conflict risk fits anchor 5; it is not the anchor-4 case of overlap with closely related skills.