Conciseness

Output structure is specified redundantly in three places (the Step 3/6 templates, the 'Output Format' section, and the ~40-line 'Example Session'), which could be consolidated. Fits anchor 3 ('mostly efficient but could be tightened'); not 2 because there is no padding explaining concepts Claude already knows — the templates are the skill's payload.

Actionability

Concrete markdown templates per step, a worked TypeScript example ('types-first development', interface User), and explicit Do/Don't lists give executable guidance. Not 5 because the templates are placeholder-driven and give no concrete guidance on pacing or depth per response.

Workflow Clarity

Steps 1-6 are clearly sequenced (Context, Architecture, Incremental Implementation, Patterns, Gotchas, Summary) with learner-engagement checkpoints ('Try it yourself', 'What would happen if...'). Not 5 because there is no explicit feedback loop for adapting when a learner is confused; the destructive/batch cap does not apply to this teaching skill.

Progressive Disclosure

A single-file skill with a well-organized heading hierarchy and no buried content; the Example Session and output templates could arguably live in a references file, a minor placement gap. Fits anchor 4 ('good structure; most content appropriately placed; minor organization gaps').

Specificity

The description names the domain ("implementing a feature", "understand the code as it's built") but contains no concrete capability verbs — it never states that the skill explains concepts, patterns, or decisions. This matches anchor 2 ('names the domain but actions are minimal or generic'), and not anchor 3 because 'implementing a feature' is generic rather than a concrete action.

Completeness

A clear, explicit 'when' clause with concrete contexts ("during onboarding, teaching, or learning a new pattern") is present, and the 'what' (implement a feature while understanding the code) is implied. Not 5 because the 'what' is folded into the 'when' and never stated as concrete capabilities; not 3 because the 'when' is explicit, not weakly implied.

Trigger Term Quality

Phrases like "implementing a feature", "onboarding", "teaching", and "learning a new pattern" are natural terms users would say when they need this skill. Not 5 because common variants such as 'explain as you go', 'walk me through', or 'teach me' are missing.

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

"implementing a feature" is broad enough to overlap with general coding/implementation skills, and sibling explanation or code-teaching skills could also match. The learning qualifier narrows it somewhat, fitting anchor 3 ('somewhat specific but could still overlap with similar skills').