Conciseness

The ~35-line body is fully imperative with zero concept explanation — every line instructs ('STOP all changes immediately. NO "one more try"', 'Fixing the artifact instead of the harness that produced it'). The trigger recap on line 1 of the process adds new conditions rather than padding, so every token earns its place (anchor 5).

Actionability

Each of the 11 steps is a concrete, executable directive with specifics: 'Ask 1-3 clarifying questions if ambiguous', 'State understanding, assumptions made, inferred-vs-told requirements, conflicts — brief bullets', 'RECOMMEND user USE SKILL post-mortem... NEVER run it yourself'. For an instruction-only skill this fully meets anchor 5's bar of concrete, specific guidance.

Workflow Clarity

A clearly sequenced 11-step process with explicit gating checkpoints ('STOP all changes immediately', 'Wait for explicit user confirmation; let the user redirect') and a pitfalls checklist covering error-recovery traps. No destructive or batch operations are involved, so the validation cap does not apply; this matches anchor 5.

Progressive Disclosure

The skill is under 50 lines, needs no external references, and is organized into clearly signaled sections (<process>, <memory> steps, <pitfalls>). Per the rubric's simple-skill guideline, this earns anchor 5 with just well-organized sections.

Specificity

The description names the failure-response domain via concrete trigger phrases ('execution failure/error, mistake, wrong/unexpected result') but never states any action or capability the skill performs. It matches anchor 2 (domain named, actions minimal or generic) rather than 3, since no concrete actions are listed at all, and not 1, since the language is specific rather than abstract.

Completeness

Only the 'when' is present ('MUST activate on: ...'); the 'what' — what the skill actually does — is entirely absent, matching anchor 2 ('only when is present without what'). It cannot score 3 because there is no clear 'what' at all.

Trigger Term Quality

Good coverage of natural user phrases ('error', 'mistake', 'wrong/unexpected result', 'user asks why something failed/didn't work', 'unhappy/upset user'), but internal-jargon triggers like 'expected≠actual mismatch' and '2 consecutive mismatches' are not things users say, and common synonyms ('bug', 'broken', 'not working') are missing. This sits between anchors 4 and 5, closer to 4.

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

The niche (a failure-response protocol) is identifiable, but generic triggers like 'execution failure/error', 'mistake', and 'unhappy/upset user' would also fire for debugging, code-review, or communication skills. Anchor 3 (somewhat specific but could still overlap) fits better than 2, since distinctive triggers like 'expected≠actual mismatch' narrow the overlap.