Conciseness

The body is lean and assumes competence: terse numbered steps, directory trees with inline comments, and no explanation of concepts Claude already knows ("Create a new complete feature module following `docs/ARCHITECTURE.md`"). Every token earns its place, matching anchor 5 rather than 4 where over-explanation would need trimming.

Actionability

Guidance is mostly executable: concrete directory trees, specific user questions ("Which API endpoints does this module consume?"), and a runnable validation command ("npx tsc --noEmit && npx next build"). It is not 5 because "Use `@builder`" is referenced without definition, the barrel export code block contains only comments, and "Add metadata export to page.tsx" gives no example; it is not 3 because the structures and commands are concrete and complete enough to execute.

Workflow Clarity

A clear 8-step sequence ends with an explicit validation step ("Validate: `npx tsc --noEmit && npx next build`"), matching anchor 4. It is not 5 because there is no error-recovery feedback loop (what to do when tsc or the build fails), and not 3 because an explicit validation checkpoint is present.

Progressive Disclosure

Architecture detail is properly delegated to a well-signaled, one-level-deep external reference ("Read `docs/ARCHITECTURE.md` sections 2, 3, 4 and 6") instead of being inlined, and the body is organized under a clear Steps section with nothing that belongs in a separate file. This matches anchor 5; no bundle files exist to introduce nesting or buried references, so it is not 4.

Specificity

"creating a new feature module with all layers - service, adapter, types, state, components, and tests" enumerates several specific concrete artifacts to create, matching anchor 4. It is not 5 because it omits hooks, stores, server actions, and routes that the skill body actually creates, and not 3 because it lists far more than 1-2 concrete actions.

Completeness

The description has both an explicit when ("Use when creating a new feature module") and a what ("with all layers - service, adapter, types, state, components, and tests"). It is not 5 because the trigger is a single phrase and the what is thin compared to the anchor-5 example, and not 3 because the when is explicit rather than missing or implied.

Trigger Term Quality

"creating a new feature module" is a natural phrase a user would say when needing this skill, giving good keyword coverage. It is not 5 because synonyms like "scaffold", "generate", or "add a feature" are missing, and not 3 because coverage goes beyond a few partial keywords.

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

"feature module with all layers" plus the layer enumeration defines a distinct scaffolding niche with minor overlap risk against closely related code-generation skills. It is not 5 because generic terms like "components" and "tests" could collide with other skills, and not 3 because the enumerated architecture layers make it clearly specific to this module pattern.