Conciseness

The skill is well-written and most content earns its place, but it's verbose in places — the 'Common Rationalizations' table, the extended 'Why one at a time' and 'Why attach a guess' explanations, and the 'Interaction with Other Skills' section add significant token cost. Some of this (e.g., explaining why batching is bad) is arguably teaching Claude things it could infer. However, the core process steps are tight and the example is genuinely useful.

Actionability

The skill provides highly concrete, executable guidance: exact formats for hypotheses, questions with guesses, restates with a specific 6-field structure, explicit stop conditions with a testable criterion ('can I predict reactions to the next three questions?'), and concrete examples of what counts as confirmation vs. not. The before/after example demonstrates the process with realistic dialogue.

Workflow Clarity

The 5-step process is clearly sequenced with explicit validation checkpoints: the 95% confidence stop condition is a testable gate, Step 5 has explicit criteria for what counts as confirmation vs. not, and there are feedback loops (fold corrections, restate, loop until explicit yes). The red flags and verification checklist provide additional guardrails. The process handles error recovery (e.g., 'three rounds without confidence rising → step back').

Progressive Disclosure

The content is well-structured with clear sections and headers, but it's a monolithic document with no references to external files. At ~300+ lines, some content (Common Rationalizations table, Interaction with Other Skills, the extended example) could be split into separate reference files. The skill mentions saving to 'docs/intent/[topic].md' but has no bundle files. For a skill of this length, the lack of any content splitting is a minor weakness.

Specificity

Lists multiple concrete actions: extracting underlying intent, conducting one-question-at-a-time interviews, reaching ~95% confidence threshold, and catching silently filled-in ambiguous requirements. These are specific, actionable behaviors.

Completeness

Clearly answers both 'what' (extracts underlying intent through iterative questioning) and 'when' (explicit 'Use when' clause covering three distinct trigger scenarios: underspecified asks, explicit user invocations, and catching ambiguous requirements).

Trigger Term Quality

Includes excellent natural trigger terms users would actually say: 'interview me', 'grill me', 'are we sure?', 'stress-test my thinking', 'build me X'. Also covers the implicit trigger of underspecified asks, which is a natural scenario description.

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

This skill occupies a clear niche as a requirements elicitation/intent clarification tool, distinct from planning, coding, or specification skills. The specific trigger phrases ('interview me', 'grill me', 'stress-test my thinking') and the focus on pre-plan/pre-code questioning make it unlikely to conflict with other skills.