Conciseness

The body is pure operational density — ordered reads ('先 Read prompts/guardrails.md，再 Read prompts/intake.md'), a phase→prompt table, path lists, and command blocks — with zero explanation of concepts Claude already knows and no padding. Every line instructs an action or names a state, matching the 'every token earns its place' anchor.

Actionability

Fully executable guidance: exact per-entry Read order, a phase table mapping each phase to the file to load ('按 docket.yaml 的 phase 只读对应文件'), copy-paste commands with flags ('python skills/patent-docket/tools/init_docket.py --case-id 案件slug --mode from_zero'), machine-readable prefixes (DOCKET_DIR/DOCKET_OK/DOCKET_ERROR), and concrete output paths ('outputs/docket/{case_id}/docket.yaml'). The placeholder (案件slug) is appropriate parameterization, not pseudocode.

Workflow Clarity

The lifecycle is clearly sequenced with a machine-validated state machine ('阶段合法跳转：references/phases.yaml。机器校验：tools/validate_docket.py'), a hard round cap with a mandatory stop ('第 3 轮结束后必须停'), and terminal-phase no-dispatch rules. It stays at 4 rather than 5 because when in the flow to run validate_docket.py / emit_tracker.py is delegated to references/handoff_contract.md instead of being an explicit step in the body's sequence — a minor validation placement gap, not missing validation (so the batch-operation cap of 3 does not apply).

Progressive Disclosure

The written structure is exemplary — one-level references, a phase table, and an explicit load-only-what-you-need rule ('不要一次读完所有 prompt') — but scored against the actual bundle, the navigation breaks at step 1: prompts/guardrails.md and the other 8 prompt files, all 3 tools/ scripts, and config.yaml referenced by the body are absent from the provided bundle, while existing files assets/tracker_readme.md, references/phase_machine.md, and references/docket.schema.yaml are never referenced from SKILL.md. Good design, unreachable core.

Specificity

Several concrete capabilities are named: '按发明人/工程师给的材料一趟写出交底书和申请文件', '申请问题清单上的缺口最多改三轮', and '缺技术事实就问人，不编'. It stops short of the 5 anchor's comprehensive coverage because it never mentions the skill's actual coordination role (分诊、派工、轮次记录), and read literally it implies the skill writes the documents itself while the body restricts it to dispatch only.

Completeness

Both questions are explicitly answered: the 'what' is concrete (one-pass 交底书 + 申请文件, ≤3 fix rounds on the issue list, ask-don't-fabricate) and the 'when' is an explicit clause ('触发：交底申请一起做、…、案卷、/patent-docket') listing concrete trigger phrases, exactly matching the top anchor.

Trigger Term Quality

The explicit trigger list covers the natural phrases a user would say in this domain, including synonyms and the slash command: '交底申请一起做、从零出交底和申请、一条龙、帮写交底再出申请、按清单改、会稿、案卷、/patent-docket' — comprehensive coverage with colloquial variants ('一条龙', '会稿').

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

It carves a clear niche — the combined disclosure-plus-application docket workflow — with distinctive triggers like '一条龙', '会稿', '案卷'. Minor overlap risk remains with closely related single-deliverable skills: '帮写交底再出申请' and '按清单改' could plausibly fire for a pure disclosure or pure application skill.