The body correctly treats vanilla conventions as table stakes ("assume them") and avoids explaining basics Claude knows, but it is a long conceptual essay ("A codebase where neither test passes easily has a naming problem dressed up as an architecture problem") with substantial philosophical elaboration that could be tightened, matching 'mostly efficient but could be tightened' rather than a lean every-token-earns-its-place level.

It provides concrete decision rules and examples (the diff test, the terseness test "would adding any peer to this parent make the terse name ambiguous?", suffix rules, painter.rs sibling examples), but much of the guidance is diagnostic/observational framing about what names 'reveal' and 'cost' rather than directly executable steps, placing it between 'some concrete guidance' and fully instructive.

The content is organized into clearly named sections and offers a verification signal via the diff test ("Remove it and the compiler or test suite will tell you"), but this is a set of principles rather than a sequenced multi-step workflow with explicit checkpoints, so it does not reach the clear-sequence-with-validation level.

Section structure and a 'The short version' summary give reasonable in-file organization, and the single reference to [cases.md](cases.md) is one level deep and clearly signaled, but no cases.md bundle file actually exists in references/scripts/assets, so the reference dangles, and the body is a long monolithic essay that could itself be split.

Quotes like "what a name commits you to, reveals about the system, and costs to change" and "planning a new package, crate, module, directory, route group, or test corpus" name the domain and trigger contexts, but the core actions are conceptual ("think about", "plan") rather than a list of concrete operations, matching the 'names domain and some actions' anchor rather than the multiple-concrete-actions level.

It explicitly states what the skill does ("How to think about names in the Grida repo... a strict, honest name refuses to grow") and gives an explicit "Use when planning a new package, crate, module, directory, route group, or test corpus" trigger, clearly answering both what and when with explicit triggers.

The "Use when planning a new package, crate, module, directory, route group, or test corpus" clause gives several relevant, fairly natural terms, but the mix leans on specialized jargon (crate, route group, test corpus) and is missing common variations a general user might say, so it sits at 'some relevant keywords but missing common variations' rather than full coverage.

The scope is tightly bound to "names in the Grida repo" with distinct triggers around planning specific artifact types, making it a clear niche unlikely to fire for unrelated skills.