Conciseness

The body is dense and token-efficient — tables, short lists, no explanations of concepts Claude already knows — but the command/workflow/judgment/reference-heavy classification is stated three times (Entry, Scenes, and the canonical workflow) and the template/checklist file references appear in four separate sections. It is not 3 because there is no concept-teaching padding, only structural repetition that the mandated SSL-lite sections partly excuse.

Actionability

Guidance is mostly executable: a 6-step canonical workflow, concrete file paths, an explicit tool list (`rg`, `find`, `awk`, `sed`, `git diff --check`, `apply_patch`), and specific validation checks. It is not 5 because the pivotal step "Draft `SKILL.md` from `resources/ssl-lite-template.md`" depends on a file that does not exist in this bundle, and no inline skeleton or example skill excerpt compensates.

Workflow Clarity

The PREPARE→ACQUIRE→REASON→ACT→VERIFY→FINALIZE scene sequence is explicit, VERIFY names the concrete checks (structural, routing, execution, resource, formatting; headings, canonical path, frontmatter, whitespace), and the failure/recovery table provides genuine error-feedback loops with clear exit criteria. This matches the anchor-5 pattern of explicit validation steps plus recovery loops plus a checklist (the 12-item guardrails).

Progressive Disclosure

The References section is clearly signaled and one level deep, but none of the referenced files exist in the bundle — no `references/`, `scripts/`, or `assets/` directories are present, and `resources/ssl-lite-template.md`, `resources/validation-checklist.md`, and `../_shared/core/*` are all dangling. It is not 4 because missing referenced files are more than a minor organization gap: an agent following this skill cannot load the template it is told to draft from.

Specificity

The description lists three concrete, comprehensive actions — "Create or update OMA skills", "converting an existing skill to the standardized Scheduling / Structural Flow / Logical Operations / References structure", and "validating whether a skill has enough routing, execution, resource, and safety detail" — which map directly onto the skill's create/update/audit branches. It is not 4 because there are no meaningful gaps in action coverage.

Completeness

It explicitly answers both questions: the "what" in third person ("Create or update OMA skills in the SSL-lite human-readable format") and the "when" via a concrete "Use when…" clause with three specific triggering scenarios. It clearly matches the anchor-5 example structure rather than the anchor-4 case where the "when" could be more explicit.

Trigger Term Quality

Triggers like "adding a new `.agents/skills/{skill-name}/SKILL.md`", "converting an existing skill", and "validating" are natural phrasings users would say, giving good keyword coverage. It is not 5 because common synonyms such as "write a skill" or "skill template/format" are absent from the description, and "OMA"/"SSL-lite" are project-internal jargon rather than user vocabulary.

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

The niche is very distinct — OMA skill authoring in the SSL-lite format under `.agents/skills/` — with trigger terms unlikely to fire for unrelated skills. Adjacent-skill boundaries (installer, plugin creator, PM Agent) are handled in the body, leaving minimal conflict risk.