Conciseness

The body is ~26 lines with zero padding: no concept explanations, no library tutorials, just "Read `docs/ARCHITECTURE.md` sections 4.1 (Services)...", terse file lists, bolded rules ("**NO try/catch**"), and a one-line validation command. Every token earns its place and the skill fully assumes Claude's competence.

Actionability

Guidance is concrete and executable: exact file paths (`types/[resource].types.ts`, `adapters/[resource]-adapter.ts`), naming conventions (snake_case vs camelCase), specific user questions, and the exact command `npx tsc --noEmit`. It stops short of the 5 anchor because no example snippets or templates of the generated files are given — the shape of each artifact is delegated entirely to the external ARCHITECTURE.md, leaving a minor gap if that doc is thin.

Workflow Clarity

A clear 5-step sequence with an ordered creation sub-list (a→d) and an explicit validation checkpoint ("Validate: `npx tsc --noEmit`"). It misses the 5 anchor because there is no error-recovery loop — nothing instructs what to do when tsc fails (fix and re-validate) — matching 'clear sequence with most checkpoints present; minor validation gaps'. The batch-file-creation cap does not apply since a validation step is present.

Progressive Disclosure

At under 50 lines with no bundle files, the skill needs no external references and is cleanly organized under a single `## Steps` section. Its one reference (`docs/ARCHITECTURE.md` §4.1-4.3) is clearly signaled, section-numbered, and one level deep, with the detailed layering rules correctly delegated there — meeting the simple-skill exception for a top score.

Specificity

The description lists several concrete deliverables — "creates types, contracts, adapter, and service layer" — naming four specific artifacts in the API-integration domain. It falls short of the 5 anchor because coverage is a single flat list with one action verb and no elaboration of what each artifact involves, matching 'several specific actions; minor gaps' rather than comprehensive coverage.

Completeness

Both parts are present: the what ("creates types, contracts, adapter, and service layer") and an explicit when-clause ("Use when adding API integration to a module"). It does not reach the 5 anchor because the trigger guidance is a single condition without additional concrete trigger phrases or variations, and the 'what' is a bare artifact list — consistent with 'both present; when could be more explicit or specific'.

Trigger Term Quality

"Use when adding API integration to a module" supplies one natural phrase a user might say, but common variations and synonyms are missing — e.g. "API client", "connect to an endpoint", "fetch data from an API", "service layer". Terms like "contracts" and "adapter" are internal artifacts users would rarely utter, so this sits at 'some relevant keywords but missing common variations' rather than the 4 anchor's good coverage.

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

The combination of types/contracts/adapter/service layer for API integration carves a fairly clear niche that few generic skills would claim, though it could overlap with broader 'write API code' or scaffolding skills — matching 'mostly distinct; minor overlap risk with closely related skills'. It is clearly above anchor 3, whose examples are generic document-file phrasing with much wider overlap.