Conciseness

Most of the body is dense, non-obvious, Figma-Slides-specific knowledge (the (240,240) auto-parenting bug, opaque SLIDE_GRID/SLIDE_ROW nodes, exact error strings, two-phase build cadence) that Claude cannot know otherwise. Two sections — Speaker Notes and Design Thinking — carry some general writing/design advice Claude largely knows ("complement the slide, not repeat it", "read the brief"), which is trimmable but confined — matching anchor 4 rather than 3, and clearly not the padded, generic-explanation style of anchors 1–2.

Actionability

The body gives copy-paste-ready executable inspection scripts, an exact error string to recognize ("figma.createPage no such property"), a concrete rename snippet, precise decision rules with numerical parameters (3–5 slides per call, 1–3 word section names), and anchored pointers to the executable helper/validation scripts. This matches anchor 5 ("Fully executable; copy-paste ready... specific examples cover the common cases").

Workflow Clarity

The deck-building workflow is a clear two-phase sequence with explicit validation checkpoints (deterministic batch validation script after every batch), screenshot checkpoints, and feedback loops for error recovery (validation fails → screenshot affected slides → fix before continuing; do not re-plan unless a batch fails). Batch operations are fully covered by validation, so the workflow cap does not apply — matching anchor 5.

Progressive Disclosure

The body is an overview that pushes detail into six real, one-level-deep reference files, each with a one-line description in the "Reference Docs" section, and all in-body anchor links resolve to actual headings (verified). Bulk material (gotchas, lifecycle, grid, properties, design principles) lives in references rather than inline, and cross-links between references are supplementary with key content duplicated inline — matching anchor 5.

Specificity

The description names the domain and tool ("use Figma's use_figma MCP tool in the Slides context") but lists no concrete capabilities — no mention of creating decks, editing slides, speaker notes, or sections. It matches anchor 2 ("Names the domain but actions are minimal or generic"), like "Processes PDF files"; it does not reach anchor 3 because there is no concrete user-facing action at all, and is not anchor 1 because the domain and tool are explicitly named.

Completeness

The "what" is stated (Slides-specific context for the use_figma tool) but the "when" is entirely absent — there is no "Use when..." clause or equivalent trigger guidance, which caps completeness at 3 per the judging guidelines. It is not anchor 2 because the "what" is clear rather than vague, and cannot be anchor 4 without any usage trigger.

Trigger Term Quality

Relevant natural keywords are present ("Figma", "Slides", "use_figma"), but common variations users would actually say — "presentation", "deck", "pitch deck" — are missing, matching anchor 3 ("Some relevant keywords but missing common variations or synonyms"). It is above anchor 2 because multiple on-domain terms exist, but below anchor 4 because everyday synonyms for the Slides product are absent.

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

The description carves out a clear niche (use_figma tool + Slides context) and explicitly differentiates the companion skill ("Can be used alongside figma-use which has foundational context"), leaving only minor overlap risk with that closely related skill — matching anchor 4. It falls short of anchor 5 because it provides no distinct trigger phrases, so a generic Figma request could plausibly match both this and figma-use.