Conciseness

The ~1140-line body repeats heavy scaffolding per step ("Purpose/Inputs/Process/Outputs/Validation/Time Estimate/Next"), then restates the same six steps twice more in "Best Practices" ("Practice: Break down until tasks cannot be meaningfully subdivided") and "Common Mistakes" ("Fix: SMART criteria - specific, measurable, testable"), and explains concepts Claude already knows (SMART criteria, critical path, topological sort). It is noticeably verbose with several padded sections, but the core workflow guidance is substantive rather than foundational-knowledge padding throughout, which keeps it above the anchor-1 example.

Actionability

Concrete commands exist ("git tag -a cp-001 -m \"Schema and OAuth\"", "npm test -- src/auth/tokens.test.ts", "grep -q \"function generateToken\" src/auth/tokens.ts || exit 1"), but key commands invoke scripts absent from the bundle ("bash scripts/validate-schema.sh plan.json", "bash scripts/generate-plan-md.sh plan.json", "scripts/visualize-deps.sh") and the execution template is pseudocode with undefined functions ("executeTask(task)", "verifyTask(task)", "createCheckpoint(task.id)"). This matches anchor 3 (concrete guidance but incomplete; pseudocode rather than executable code) better than anchor 4, since the gaps exceed minor.

Workflow Clarity

The "6-step sequential process" is clearly sequenced with per-step Validation checklists ("[ ] Every task has specific success criteria"), explicit quality gates ("Gate 1: Foundation Complete"), and a real feedback loop at the decision point ("If <90: Apply fixes, return to relevant step, re-verify"). This squarely matches anchor 5: clear sequence, explicit validation steps, error-recovery loops, and checklists for a complex process.

Progressive Disclosure

Scored against the actual bundle: of the ~9 paths the body references, only "references/task-tool-coordination.md" exists; "scripts/visualize-deps.sh", "scripts/validate-schema.sh" (cited twice, once as ".claude/skills/multi-ai-planning/scripts/validate-schema.sh"), "scripts/generate-plan-md.sh", "templates/VERIFICATION_TEMPLATE.md", "templates/PLAN_TEMPLATE.md", "examples/", and the three schemas (plan.schema.json, task.schema.json, checkpoint.schema.json) are all missing. Meanwhile ~130 lines of near-identical fill-in assessment templates in Step 5 and the section headers are inlined monolithically. This fits anchor 2 (content that clearly belongs in separate files is inlined; navigation points to files that don't resolve) better than anchor 3, where references are present but merely under-signaled.

Specificity

"Create production-ready, agent-executable plans using verification-first approach, hierarchical decomposition, dependency mapping, and quality gates" names the domain plus several concrete techniques. It falls short of anchor 5 because the only concrete action verb is "Create... plans" — the rest are method names — and outputs (plan.json, PLAN.md) and coverage details are omitted; it is clearly above anchor 3, which expects only 1-2 concrete actions.

Completeness

It explicitly answers both what ("Create production-ready, agent-executable plans using verification-first approach, hierarchical decomposition, dependency mapping, and quality gates") and when ("Use when planning complex features, migrations, refactorings, security implementations, or any multi-step agentic workflows requiring rigorous verification and parallel execution coordination") with concrete trigger phrases, exactly matching the anchor-5 example pattern.

Trigger Term Quality

"Use when planning complex features, migrations, refactorings, security implementations, or any multi-step agentic workflows" gives good natural keyword coverage users would actually say. It sits at anchor 4 rather than 5 because common variations like "implementation plan", "task breakdown", "roadmap", or "project planning" are missing; it is well above anchor 3's "some relevant keywords but missing common variations".

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

"agent-executable plans", "multi-AI research integration (Claude + Gemini + Codex)", and "parallel execution coordination" carve out a mostly distinct planning niche, but "planning complex features, migrations, refactorings" overlaps with general feature-development and project-planning skills, so it fits anchor 4 (mostly distinct, minor overlap risk with closely related skills) rather than anchor 5's clear-niche bar, and is well above anchor 3.