Conciseness

The body is dense and operational — resolution orders, tables, guardrails, concrete git/gh commands — with no explanations of concepts Claude already knows. However, several facts are stated multiple times (the archify sidecar's 2-attempt/5-minute cap appears in three places; guardrails largely restate Control-flow features; the Dependencies section repeats Tools and instruments), so it is 'efficient; minor instances... that could be trimmed' rather than fully lean.

Actionability

Concrete guidance is strong: exact commands (`gh pr diff`, `git diff main...{branch}`, `git diff --cached`, `oma explain validate [file]`), explicit output paths (`.agents/results/explain/{YYYY-MM-DD}-{slug}.html`), a numbered ref-resolution order, and a bounded fix loop. It is not copy-paste-ready end-to-end because the HTML authoring and grep checklist details live in `resources/html-contract.md`, and the 'explainable diff' predicate is deferred to an external workflow file — mostly executable with minor gaps, so 4 rather than 5.

Workflow Clarity

The scene sequence (RESOLVE → COLLECT → GATE → GENERATE → VALIDATE → DELIVER) is explicit with a pre-generation secret gate, a post-generation checklist validation loop bounded at 3 fix iterations, explicit stop conditions in Failure and recovery, and defined exit criteria (Success/Partial/Failure). This matches the anchor 'clear sequence with explicit validation steps; feedback loops for error recovery; checklists for complex processes' — nothing above it exists on the scale.

Progressive Disclosure

The body is a scheduling overview that cleanly defers WHAT to `resources/document-structure.md` and HOW to `resources/html-contract.md`, each annotated with its scope, plus a References section restating both — good one-level-deep structure. It scores 4 rather than 5 because none of the referenced files (`resources/*.md`, `_shared/conditional/diagram-engine.md`, `.agents/workflows/explain.md`) exist in the bundle, and the diagram-engine/conditional references are one step less clearly signaled than the two core contracts.

Specificity

"Create an offline HTML explanation of a code diff, PR, or branch" names the domain (diff/PR/branch, offline HTML) and one concrete action (create an explanation), but does not list several specific actions. It matches the 'names domain and 1-2 concrete actions' anchor; a 4 would require multiple distinct actions like the PDF extract/fill/merge example.

Completeness

It explicitly answers both: what — "Create an offline HTML explanation of a code diff, PR, or branch" — and when — "Use when an interactive code-change walkthrough is requested." Both are concrete and explicit with a clear trigger phrase, matching the anchor 5 example structure. A 4 would leave the 'when' weaker or less specific than this.

Trigger Term Quality

"code diff, PR, or branch" and "interactive code-change walkthrough" are natural phrases a user would plausibly say. A few common variations are missing (e.g., "explain this change", "commit", "walk me through") — good coverage but not comprehensive, matching the anchor 4 rather than 5.

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

"offline HTML explanation of a code diff, PR, or branch" carves a fairly distinct niche (interactive explainer documents) that is unlikely to grab requests for code review, docs generation, or slide decks. Minor overlap risk remains with adjacent diff/document skills (e.g., docs-drift or PR review), so it fits 'mostly distinct; minor overlap risk' rather than the fully distinct anchor 5.