Conciseness

Telegraphic, dense instruction throughout ('Find drift between what repo says and what it does. Report first; change only what maintainer selects.') with zero padding and no explanation of concepts Claude already knows; every token earns its place. Not 4 because there is no trimmable over-explanation anywhere.

Actionability

Concrete and executable in structure — exact files to read first, a mode/trigger/writes table, a worked example finding with paths and line numbers, a copy-paste 'gh label create' command, and a full output template in references — but lane checks are stated as comparisons ('documented command exists as script/target/tool') rather than executable commands, which is anchor 4's 'concrete guidance with minor gaps' rather than fully copy-paste-ready. Not 3 because the guidance is specific and directly followable, not pseudocode.

Workflow Clarity

Five clearly sequenced steps with validation checkpoints throughout: baseline commit/dirty state capture, 'recheck each against current source' before fixing, static verification, diff display, per-finding status reporting ('fixed, deferred, unselected or blocked'), and hard stops before commit/push/PR — with error-recovery paths ('Ambiguous fix: ask, don't guess'; label-conflict fallback). The destructive/batch cap does not apply since validation is explicit, and no checkpoint is missing.

Progressive Disclosure

The body is an orchestration overview; lane detail and output format are split into two real, verified, one-level-deep references ([health lanes](references/health-lanes.md), [findings and output](references/findings-and-output.md)) that nest no further and are clearly signaled with descriptive link anchors; navigation is easy and the split is appropriate.

Specificity

Lists multiple concrete actions covering every lane — 'verify CODEMAP.md paths', 'ownership or security policy drift', 'stale or duplicated configuration', 'dead links and references' — plus both write modes ('turn health findings into issues', 'fix selected health findings'); coverage matches the skill's full scope with no gaps, matching the comprehensive anchor rather than the 'minor gaps' anchor 4.

Completeness

Explicitly answers what ('Checks general repository health and reports evidence-backed drift without imposing conventions the repository has not adopted') and when via a concrete 'USE FOR' trigger list, plus a 'DO NOT USE FOR' exclusion set — the exact what+when-with-triggers structure of the anchor-5 example, not the 'when could be more specific' anchor 4.

Trigger Term Quality

Natural user phrasings ('greenkeep this repo', 'repository health check', 'README or contributor docs out of date', 'dead links and references', 'stale') plus a concrete filename (CODEMAP.md) give comprehensive coverage including synonyms; no common variant a user would say is missing.

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

Clear niche (general repository drift) with an explicit 'DO NOT USE FOR' section redirecting each adjacent domain to its named sibling skill (fusion-app-greenkeeping, fusion-service-greenkeeping, fusion-repository-greenkeeping, fusion-dependency-review, fusion-skills), leaving minimal overlap risk.