Conciseness

Every section carries operational content — mode routing, command names, failure recoveries, guardrails — with zero explanation of concepts Claude already knows. The dense 'Missing CLI' row is long but every clause is an actionable instruction, matching 'every token earns its place'.

Actionability

Concrete executable commands are given for all four modes (`oma docs verify --json`, `oma docs sync <range> --json`, etc.) plus a fully specified manual fallback (extract `[text](path)`/`href` targets, resolve relative to containing file). Not 5 because exact flags and output-file details are deferred to `resources/commands.md`, which is not present in the bundle — the body alone is not copy-paste complete for the common cases.

Workflow Clarity

The canonical command path is a clear 5-step sequence with explicit validation checkpoints ('Re-run affected checks after edits and record remaining failures') and a full failure/recovery table providing feedback loops for each failure mode (patch fails → re-read and apply equivalent correction; index write fails → report, don't claim completion).

Progressive Disclosure

Good structure with well-signaled, one-level-deep references: mode details deferred to `resources/commands.md` ('Read only the matching section'), authorization policy and translation routed to external files, and a bottom References section. Not 5 because the primary reference target `resources/commands.md` does not exist in the bundle — navigation dead-ends — and two of three references point outside the skill.

Specificity

Three concrete actions are named — "Check documentation references", "sync docs to code changes", "detect translation drift" — which matches the anchor for several specific actions with minor coverage gaps (lint/style checking from the body is omitted). Not 5 because coverage is not comprehensive: no mention of localized-prose linting, URL verification, or report generation that the body supports.

Completeness

Both parts are explicit: what ("Check documentation references, sync docs to code changes, and detect translation drift") and when ("Use for documentation maintenance in a repository"). The 'when' clause is present but general — no concrete trigger phrases like 'when the user mentions docs, links, or translations' — so it matches the anchor where 'when' could be more explicit or specific rather than the fully-triggered 5.

Trigger Term Quality

Natural phrases like "sync docs to code changes", "translation drift", and "documentation maintenance" are what a user would plausibly say. Not 5 because common variations are missing: "broken links", "out-of-date docs", "readme", "markdown", or file extensions; not 3 because coverage clearly goes beyond a couple of generic keywords with several relevant domain terms.

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

The niche (repo doc verification, diff-based sync, translation drift) is fairly distinct with specific triggers, matching "mostly distinct; minor overlap risk". Minor overlap remains with general code-review and translation skills, which the body disambiguates via 'oma-translation' routing but the description alone does not fully separate.