Conciseness

The 22-line body is dense with guidance and assumes Claude's competence; the only anecdote ("In our lab an allow-list serializer silently dropped `owner` and broke a journey") is one line of environment-specific knowledge Claude could not have, so it earns its place. No padding or explanations of known concepts.

Actionability

Concrete guidance throughout: layer-to-concern mapping ("server for access, payments, and validation; template for rendering; job for async"), named helpers (`requireOwner`, `safePath`, `parsePublicUrl`, `toPublic`), and a hard decision rule ("Customer-visible or policy change? Then NEEDS-PRODUCT-DECISION"). Not a 5: item 3 delegates sibling-search mechanics entirely to `fix-class-sweep` without a hint of how, and items 7/9 are bare prompts with no concrete method.

Workflow Clarity

A clearly sequenced 9-step fill procedure capped by an explicit "## Exit criteria" section ("The plan is complete, and approvals are requested in one batch if needed") serving as the completion checkpoint. This is a single-task, under-50-line planning skill with no destructive or batch operation, so the simple-skill exception applies and the sequence is unambiguous.

Progressive Disclosure

Well-organized short body with clear sections, appropriate for an under-50-line skill. Not a 5: the body's central instruction "Fill `templates/fix-plan.md`" points at a file that does not exist in the bundle (no references/, scripts/, assets/, or templates/ directories are present), leaving the primary artifact unresolvable; the cross-skill pointers (`fix-class-sweep`, `qa-recon-risk-map`) are also unverifiable within the bundle.

Specificity

"Plan the smallest correct fix at the right trust boundary, listing siblings, callers, adjacent journeys, contract changes, data impact, rollback, and approvals before writing code" names multiple specific concrete actions covering the entire fix-planning lifecycle, matching the comprehensive-coverage anchor. Not a 4: the action list has no notable coverage gaps across scoping, impact, rollback, and approvals.

Completeness

Explicitly answers what ("Plan the smallest correct fix... listing siblings, callers, adjacent journeys, contract changes, data impact, rollback, and approvals") and when ("Use for every non-trivial fix and always for security, payment, auth, or data bugs") with concrete trigger phrases. Not a 4: the 'when' clause is explicit and enumerated, not merely present-but-vague.

Trigger Term Quality

Natural terms users would say are present: "fix", "non-trivial fix", "security, payment, auth, or data bugs". Not a 3: coverage goes beyond a couple of generic keywords; not a 5: common synonyms users might say ("vulnerability", "hotfix", "patch", "regression") are absent.

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

The fix-planning/blast-radius niche itself is distinct, but "Use for every non-trivial fix" claims virtually any bug-fix session, overlapping heavily with general debugging, code-review, and fix-execution skills. Anchor 3 fits (somewhat specific but could still overlap with similar skills); not a 4 because the trigger's breadth creates more than minor overlap risk.