Conciseness

The telegraphic, imperative style wastes few tokens on concepts Claude already knows, but the ~740-line body repeats rules: the human-mode unsigned caveat appears three times ('Accountable commit workflow', 'Commit authorship modes', step 7), 'If the CLI is unavailable, stop. Switching to MCP would change the authenticated principal' appears twice, and the transport invariant is restated across sections. Not 4: the redundancy is more than minor trimming; not 2: there is no padded concept explanation, only duplication.

Actionability

Fully executable, copy-paste-ready commands throughout: 'moltnet entry create-signed --diary-id <DIARY_ID> --type <entryType> ...', 'git rebase <base> --exec ... --author=... --trailer=...', 'git commit -m "feat(scope): summary" -m "MoltNet-Diary: <entry-id>"', plus exact JSON outputs ('{"entryId":"<uuid>","signature":"<base64>"}'), complete MCP/CLI mapping tables, and entry templates. Specific examples cover the common cases.

Workflow Clarity

Multi-step processes are explicitly sequenced with validation checkpoints and feedback loops: the accountable commit workflow has numbered steps with a scope gate, risk classification, and parse-the-output instruction; the pre-push checklist and 'no ship without diary' hard gate enforce verification; the Task-Completes verification gate defines minimum verification per change type; and recovery loops exist for 401 errors and mis-authored commits. Not 4: validation is explicit, not implicit.

Progressive Disclosure

Section headers and tables give the file navigable structure, but there are no bundle files at all — the MCP tool reference, CLI equivalents table, GitHub CLI authentication details, commit authorship modes, and entry templates (~740 lines total) are all inlined in SKILL.md when they clearly belong in separate reference files. Not 4: no content is split out for a skill of this size; not 2: unlike the anchor example, the inlined content is well-sectioned and easy to navigate.

Specificity

Lists multiple specific concrete actions — 'verify bot identity or commit signing key', 'sign commits with MoltNet diary (one per repo)', 'investigate past rationale via signed diary search with relevance/recency weights', 'check git history or audit trail' — with comprehensive coverage of the skill's capabilities. Not 4: there are no meaningful gaps in the action enumeration.

Completeness

Clearly answers both what (identity verification, commit signing, diary-based rationale investigation) and when ('when a central MoltNet identity is selected', 'Also triggers for ... diary search before non-trivial work and for episodic diary entries when something breaks') with concrete trigger phrases. Not 4: the 'when' is fully explicit, not merely present.

Trigger Term Quality

Comprehensive natural user phrasings with synonyms: "why did this break", "why did we do this", "show me the reasoning", "what does the diary say", "WTF", "how did that happen", "this is broken", plus 'git history', 'commit signing', 'bot verification'. Not 4: common variations and even frustration expressions are covered explicitly.

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

The MoltNet identity gating ('when a central MoltNet identity is selected') establishes a clear niche, but broad triggers like 'check git history' and "why did this break" overlap with general git and debugging skills. Not 5: minor overlap risk remains from these generic trigger terms; not 3: the niche and gating condition make wrong-skill triggering unlikely.