The body is lean and direct with no concept explanations or padding; it states the workflow and template and assumes Claude's competence, matching the 'lean and efficient; every token earns its place' anchor.

It gives an exact template to follow, concrete item counts (6-10), verb-first framing, named file patterns (src/..., app/...), and concrete validation examples ('Run npm test'); per the code-vs-instruction note, actionable instruction-only guidance is not penalized for lacking code.

A clear 4-step sequence (scan -> ask -> create plan -> output) with explicit ordering guidance; the skill is explicitly read-only and non-destructive, so the destructive/batch feedback-loop cap does not apply, and the simple-skill note allows a 3 for clear single-purpose workflows.

A single well-organized file (~60 lines) split into clear sections (Goal, Minimal workflow, Plan template, Checklist item guidance) with no external references needed; per the simple-skill note, well-organized sections score 3.

"Create a concise plan" names the domain and one concrete action but does not list multiple specific actions, matching the 'names domain and some actions, but not comprehensive' anchor.

It explicitly answers both what ("Create a concise plan") and when ("Use when a user explicitly asks for a plan related to a coding task"), matching the clear-both-what-and-when anchor.

"plan" and "coding task" are natural terms a user would say, but coverage is limited and misses common variations like 'make a plan', 'roadmap', or 'steps', so it is not the broad-coverage level 3.

"plan related to a coding task" scopes a niche but the trigger could still overlap with general planning or brainstorming skills, so it is not the clearly-distinct level 3.