Conciseness

The body is lean and list-driven with no explanations of concepts Claude already knows, but the "Checkpoint por camada" paragraph carries justifying prose ("camada B empilhada sobre camada A instável só mascara o problema, não resolve") that could be trimmed to the rule itself, matching the efficient-with-minor-trimmable-instances anchor.

Actionability

Layer contents are concrete ("job em uma frase, campos de input, campos de output", "multi-shot examples (1-3 pares input→output)") and the checkpoint specifies running 3-5 real inputs, but no example prompt is shown inline and the complete template is deferred to `templates/agent-spec.md`, a file not present in the bundle, leaving key details unverifiable.

Workflow Clarity

The 3-layer build is an explicit, ordered sequence with per-layer validation gates ("Testar aqui antes de avançar") and a concrete feedback loop (run 3-5 inputs, fix in the current layer, re-run, only advance when all pass), matching the top anchor for sequence plus validation plus error recovery.

Progressive Disclosure

Sections are well-organized, the body stays at overview level, and details are split out with clear signals ("Ver `templates/agent-spec.md` para o template completo"), but none of the referenced files (policies, templates, patterns) exist in the bundle, leaving minor organization/resolvability gaps.

Specificity

"Projeta e avalia prompts reutilizaveis e suas saidas" names the domain and exactly two concrete actions (design, evaluate), matching the 1-2-actions anchor; it does not list several specific actions such as standardizing templates or tuning cost, so it is not a 4.

Completeness

It clearly answers both questions: the "what" is stated as designing and evaluating reusable prompts and their outputs, and the "when" is an explicit "Trigger em:" clause with eleven concrete trigger phrases, matching the top anchor.

Trigger Term Quality

The trigger list is broad and natural ("melhorar prompt", "otimizar prompt", "iterar prompt", "template de prompt", "system prompt", "few-shot"), covering synonyms for the core intents, but misses common phrasings a user would naturally say such as "criar prompt" or "escrever prompt", keeping it below comprehensive coverage.

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

The prompt-design niche is mostly distinct with dedicated triggers ("prompt engineering", "template de prompt"), but broad terms like "few-shot" and "chain of thought" could also fire for general LLM-discussion or reasoning skills, so minor overlap risk remains.