Conciseness

The body is dense with non-generic, repo-specific knowledge (probe commands, card fields, lookup traps) and never explains concepts Claude already knows, but a few rhetorical passages could be trimmed — e.g. 'This is the ownership step. Everything below is analysis... written first so a run that ends early still leaves it behind'. Efficient with minor instances of over-explanation, matching anchor 4 rather than the every-token-earns-its-place anchor 5.

Actionability

Fully executable throughout: exact probes ('git ls-remote --exit-code origin HEAD'), the card commands ('bun run --cwd tools/pr-metrics card -- --resolve-issue'), a branch-slug-escaping git add, a duplicate-block guard ('grep -c '^<details><summary>Session metrics''), a complete RETRO.md template, and an issue-filing table naming repos, labels and issue types. Not 4 because even the failure paths (no gh, no network, no transcripts) carry concrete instructions.

Workflow Clarity

Steps 1–7 are explicitly sequenced with pre-flight environment probes, validation checkpoints (verify the card is not already on the PR body, match the summary line rather than the tag), and feedback loops for error recovery (record which step failed and carry on; re-run only what is needed). Matches the explicit-validation anchor rather than the minor-gaps anchor 4.

Progressive Disclosure

One clearly-signaled, one-level-deep reference ('references/card-signals.md' — 'Read it before Step 3') that exists in the bundle and matches what the body says it contains, and the body is well-sectioned. Falls short of anchor 5 because the body itself is ~330 lines and some inline material — the Step 2 signal table and the --resolve-issue lookup rationale — overlaps what a second reference file could hold; exceeds anchor 3 because the existing split is clean and correctly timed.

Specificity

Enumerates multiple concrete actions covering the skill's full scope: 'write and commit the session-metrics card for the branch', 'read what the session actually cost against the difficulty declared before it started', and 'turn that into concrete changes to the skills, CLAUDE.md, the wiki, the tests or the brief'. No generic filler and no coverage gaps within its niche, matching the comprehensive-actions anchor rather than the minor-gaps anchor below it.

Completeness

Explicitly answers both questions: 'Use when running the retrospective on a piece of work that has just finished — the retro, normally the step straight after prep-pr opens the pull request' is a concrete when-clause, and the enumerated actions state exactly what it does. Not the level below (4) because the when is explicit and specific, not merely present.

Trigger Term Quality

Includes the natural synonym pair 'retrospective'/'retro' plus 'pull request' and 'session-metrics card', giving good keyword coverage. It falls short of the comprehensive anchor (5) because alternate natural phrasings such as 'post-mortem' or 'what did this session cost' are absent, but it clearly exceeds the missing-synonyms anchor (3).

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

Clear niche with distinct triggers: it positions itself as 'the step straight after prep-pr opens the pull request' and asserts sole ownership ('Also the owner of the card — nothing else writes one carrying the pull request's identity'), leaving minimal room to fire for the wrong skill. Not 4 because the ownership and workflow-position boundaries are explicit rather than merely mostly distinct.