Conciseness

Of ~575 lines, roughly 300 are two fully worked examples (CRUD, CI/CD) that largely restate the 145-line template, and the 'Ralph Philosophy' paragraph plus DO/DON'T/Best Practices sections repeat guidance already embedded in the workflow. This is noticeably verbose with several padded sections — the 2 anchor — rather than merely 'could be tightened'.

Actionability

The skill provides a copy-paste-ready prompt template, two completely filled-in example prompts, an exact invocation command ('/ralph-wiggum:ralph-loop "..." --completion-promise ... --max-iterations 50') with iteration counts by task complexity. Guidance is fully executable and covers the common cases.

Workflow Clarity

The four-step generation workflow (map tasks, define phases, create milestones, structure prompt) is clearly sequenced, and the generated-prompt template embeds explicit checkpoints, success criteria, and 'If Stuck' recovery guidance. Not 5 because the generation workflow itself lacks a final validation step (e.g., verifying every task maps to a phase and dependencies resolve).

Progressive Disclosure

The body has good section headers and one-level pointers to sibling skills (ralph-prompt-single-task, ralph-prompt-project, ralph-prompt-research), but there are no bundle files at all — the 300+ lines of worked examples that clearly belong in a references/examples file are inlined in SKILL.md. Structure exists but content that should be separate is inline — the 3 anchor.

Specificity

The description lists several concrete capabilities — 'Creates phased prompts with sequential milestones, cumulative progress tracking, and phase-based completion promises' — which is specific, though it stops short of comprehensively covering what the generated prompts contain (e.g., task inventories, checkpoints). Not 5 because coverage of the output structure has minor gaps; not 3 because more than 1-2 concrete actions are named.

Completeness

It explicitly answers both questions: what ('Generate Ralph-compatible prompts... Creates phased prompts with sequential milestones, cumulative progress tracking, and phase-based completion promises') and when ('Use when creating prompts for CRUD implementations, multi-step features, staged migrations, or any work requiring multiple distinct but related tasks'). Matches the 5 anchor with concrete trigger phrases.

Trigger Term Quality

Natural user phrases like 'CRUD implementations', 'multi-step features', 'staged migrations', and 'multiple distinct but related tasks' give good keyword coverage. Not 5 because common variations such as 'prompt writing/generation', 'task sequencing', or 'breaking work into phases' are absent; not 3 because the terms present are the ones users would actually say.

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

'Ralph-compatible prompts for multiple related tasks' carves a clear niche distinct from the single-task/research variants, though 'staged migrations' and 'multi-step features' could overlap with the project-level sibling skill. Mostly distinct with minor overlap risk against closely related skills — the 4 anchor.