Conciseness

The body is lean and repo-specific with almost no filler — classification table, exact commands, and project quirks — but includes a few trims: the rebase ours/theirs semantics ('remember Git reverses the intuitive meaning of ours/theirs') restates a Git concept Claude already knows, and the Core Rule slightly duplicates the workflow steps. This fits anchor 4 ('efficient; minor instances of over-explanation that could be trimmed') rather than the every-token-earns-its-place of 5.

Actionability

Fully executable throughout: 'git diff --name-only --diff-filter=U', './frb_internal precommit-generate', 'git checkout --ours -- <generated-path>', per-package codegen commands, and concrete validation commands ('git diff --check', 'git status --short'). It also covers the common failure case ('CI errors mention missing methods on RustLibApi means package frb_generated.* is stale'), matching anchor 5.

Workflow Clarity

Clear numbered sequence (classify → resolve hand-written → placeholder → stage → regenerate → inspect → commit) with an explicit Validation section of runnable checkpoint commands, error-recovery guidance for the stale-package case, and a feedback loop ('If CI later reports more generated diff, add the experience back to this skill'). This matches anchor 5: clear sequence, explicit validation, feedback loops.

Progressive Disclosure

No bundle files exist (no references/, scripts/, or assets/), and the single-file structure with headers, a classification table, and clearly named sibling-skill handoffs ('frb-code-generation', 'frb-fix-ci') is well organized. It falls short of anchor 5 because those handoffs are named in prose rather than linked/pathed references, and no navigation to the env-setup material is provided — 'good structure, references mostly clear, minor organization gaps' (4) is the best fit.

Specificity

The description names the domain ('resolving merge or rebase conflicts in flutter_rust_bridge') and one concrete action area ('conflicts involving generated files'), but does not list the actual capabilities (semantic resolution of hand-written files, regenerating outputs). It sits between anchor 3 ('names domain and 1-2 concrete actions, but not comprehensive') and anchor 4; it lacks the several-specific-actions listing of 4, so 3 is the best fit.

Completeness

The 'when' is fully explicit ('Use when resolving merge or rebase conflicts... after master/main changed independently from a PR branch') and the 'what' is present but minimal — resolving FRB conflicts, especially generated ones — without stating the distinctive capability (regenerate rather than hand-resolve). This matches anchor 4 ('has both what and when; when could be more explicit or specific' — here the what is the weaker half) better than 5, which requires both fully concrete.

Trigger Term Quality

Strong natural terms users would say: 'merge', 'rebase', 'conflicts', 'generated files', 'master/main', 'PR branch', plus the project name. A few common variations are missing (e.g., 'conflict markers', 'codegen', 'regenerate'), so it fits anchor 4 ('good keyword coverage; a few natural terms missing') rather than the comprehensive synonym coverage of 5.

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

Clear niche with distinct triggers: it is scoped to flutter_rust_bridge conflict resolution with generated files, master/main-vs-PR drift specifics. A generic git merge-conflict skill could overlap on 'merge conflicts', but the FRB and generated-file scoping makes wrong-skill triggering unlikely, matching anchor 5.