Conciseness

The body is lean and assumes Claude's competence — no basic concepts are explained, and the plan template, loop, and escalation sections all earn their tokens. It sits at 4 rather than 5 because the Triggers section substantially restates the frontmatter description, a small amount of duplication that could be trimmed.

Actionability

Guidance is fully executable for a process skill: a copy-paste-ready plan.md skeleton with section-by-section instructions ("One paragraph. What does done look like?", "Note alternatives considered and why rejected"), a concrete file-level changes format, and a specific escalation path ("create an ADR in docs/adr/ (use /adr if available)"). The scoring note's exception for instruction-only skills applies, and the guidance is unambiguously actionable.

Workflow Clarity

The Loop section gives a clear sequence with explicit checkpoints: user approval before implementation ("get approval (or explicit 'go ahead')"), a feedback loop for error recovery ("If reality contradicts the plan, stop and update the plan before continuing"), and a completion summary comparing planned vs. actual. A checklist is built into the plan template, matching the 5 anchor; no destructive or batch operations apply a cap.

Progressive Disclosure

This is a short (~54 lines), single-purpose skill with no bundle files, and the simple-skill guidance applies: all content appropriately lives in one well-organized file with clear section headers (Triggers, Plan Structure, Loop, Escalation) and no nested references. The only external pointers (docs/adr/, the /adr skill) are one level deep and clearly signaled.

Specificity

The description names concrete actions — "write or update plan.md with goals, approach, file-level changes, risks, and a checklist" — enumerating the plan's required components. It falls short of the 5 anchor because body-level capabilities (ADR escalation, the implement/update/summarize loop) are absent, leaving minor gaps in coverage.

Completeness

It explicitly answers both what ("write or update plan.md with goals, approach, file-level changes, risks, and a checklist" before non-trivial implementation) and when ("Use when the user asks to build a feature, refactor, fix a non-obvious bug, or whenever scope is unclear"), plus an explicit skip clause ("Skip only for one-line tweaks or pure questions") that exceeds the 5 anchor's standard.

Trigger Term Quality

Natural user phrases like "build a feature", "refactor", "fix a non-obvious bug", and "scope is unclear" are present and would be said verbatim. A few natural terms are missing — the body's "migrate / upgrade dependencies" and "anything spanning more than ~2 files" triggers are not surfaced in the description, and no synonyms are offered.

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

The planning-workflow niche with its distinct artifact (plan.md) is clear and unlikely to be confused with domain skills. Broad triggers like "build a feature" and "refactor" create minor overlap risk with general coding skills, keeping it below the 5 anchor.