Conciseness

The ~46-line body is lean and efficient, with only concrete commands, complete regex patterns, and example branch names; it assumes Claude's competence and explains no background concepts, matching the score-5 anchor 'every token earns its place'.

Actionability

Executable commands (`git rev-parse --is-inside-work-tree`, `git rev-parse --abbrev-ref HEAD`) and complete regex patterns with examples are provided, but the spec-directory existence check and ticket-segment extraction are described in prose rather than as a copy-paste runnable command, a minor gap that holds it below 5.

Workflow Clarity

The Prerequisites → Validation Rules → Execution → Graceful Degradation sequence is clear with explicit checkpoints (git-availability gate, ✓/⚠/✗ output signals, spec-directory existence check), matching score 4; it stays below 5 because the spec-directory check is asserted without a concrete filesystem command and there is no explicit retry loop on a missing spec dir.

Progressive Disclosure

This is a simple single-purpose skill under 50 lines with well-organized sections and no need for external references; no bundle files exist in references/scripts/assets to verify, so the simple-skill guideline allows a 5 for well-organized sections alone.

Specificity

The phrase 'Validate current branch follows feature branch naming conventions' names the domain (branch naming conventions) plus one concrete action ('validate'), matching the score-3 anchor 'Names domain and 1-2 concrete actions, but not comprehensive'; it falls short of 4 because only a single action is named rather than several specific ones.

Completeness

The description gives a clear 'what' (validate branch naming) but no explicit 'when'/trigger clause, which the rubric guideline caps at 3; it is above 2 because the 'what' is concrete rather than vague.

Trigger Term Quality

Natural terms a user would say ('current branch', 'feature branch', 'naming conventions') are present, but common variations or synonyms are missing and there is no explicit 'Use when' trigger phrase, matching the score-3 anchor; it does not reach 4 because keyword coverage is not broad enough.

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

'feature branch naming conventions' targets a fairly specific niche with only minor overlap risk against general git skills, matching the score-4 anchor 'Mostly distinct; minor overlap risk'; it is below 5 because no explicit distinct trigger phrase is given.