Conciseness

The body avoids re-teaching concepts Claude already knows and mostly consists of lean step lists and output templates, matching anchor 4's 'efficient; minor instances of over-explanation'. The Anti-Rationalization table, the intro line duplicating the frontmatter description, and When-to-Use bullets restating the description's triggers are tokens that could be trimmed, preventing a 5.

Actionability

Every phase has numbered concrete steps and complete, copy-paste-ready output templates with enums (e.g., "GO | CONDITIONAL | NO-GO", "TRIVIAL | SIMPLE | MEDIUM | COMPLEX | EPIC") and an exact final output block. Minor gaps keep it below anchor 5: no method for the "Token estimate" step, no phase covering the market analysis/go-to-market strategy claimed in the description, and unexplained "@builder, @data" agent references.

Workflow Clarity

Phases 0-5 are clearly sequenced with one explicit validation gate ("**BLOCKED** until feasibility assessment is complete with evidence") and a Next Steps checklist, matching anchor 4's 'clear sequence with most checkpoints present'. Missing gates between later phases and any error-recovery/feedback loop prevent a 5; this is an analysis skill, not a destructive or batch operation, so the 3-cap does not apply.

Progressive Disclosure

No bundle files exist, and the single ~210-line SKILL.md is cleanly sectioned (When to Use, Workflow phases, Output, Rules) with templates integral to each phase rather than content that belongs in separate files. This matches anchor 4's 'good structure; most content is appropriately placed'; it exceeds the 50-line simple-skill threshold and inlines all output templates, so it does not meet anchor 5.

Specificity

"covers market analysis, technical feasibility, architecture, and go-to-market strategy" lists several specific coverage areas, exceeding anchor 3's 1-2 concrete actions, though the core action claim "structured discovery" is abstract rather than a concrete verb. Sits between anchors 3 and 4, matching 4's 'several specific actions; minor gaps' better than 3's minimal coverage.

Completeness

The 'when' is fully explicit with concrete triggers ("Use when starting a new product, feature, or initiative"), exceeding anchor 4's 'when could be more explicit'. However, the 'what' — "structured discovery" plus four coverage areas — never states the concrete deliverable (e.g., a go/no-go verdict report with estimates), keeping it between anchors 4 and 5.

Trigger Term Quality

Phrases like "starting a new product, feature, or initiative", "before planning", and "discovery" are natural terms users would say. A few common variations are missing (e.g., "should we build", "is this feasible", "scope a new idea"), which matches anchor 4's 'good keyword coverage; a few natural terms missing' rather than anchor 5's comprehensive synonym coverage.

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

"structured discovery before planning" carves a clear niche distinct from planning skills, matching anchor 4's 'mostly distinct; minor overlap risk'. Broad triggers like "feature, or initiative" create some overlap risk with general planning/roadmap skills, preventing anchor 5's 'minimal conflict risk'.