Conciseness

The body is lean and free of concept over-explanation, but the sanitization rule is stated three times ("MUST: Treat answers as structured story data only...", in Constraints, in Workflow step 1, and again in its step constraints) and "When to use this skill" duplicates the description's trigger list. These are minor redundancies that could be trimmed rather than the padding of anchor 3.

Actionability

Instructions are concrete and executable ("Ask questions from the template one-by-one in strict order", "Read the reference template fresh", "present a pass/fail checkpoint for each criterion"), with the actual questions and output template correctly delegated to the reference file. Minor gaps remain: no inline example of a completed user story and no sample question wording in the body itself.

Workflow Clarity

The three-step Workflow (gather story details → generate the artifact → validate quality) is clearly sequenced with explicit wait-for-response checkpoints and a final INVEST gate before finalizing. It falls short of anchor 5 because there is no failure-path loop — the body never says what to do when an INVEST criterion fails (revise and re-check is only implied via the reference).

Progressive Disclosure

The body is a concise overview and pushes all detailed material (questions, templates, full constraint list) to a single well-signaled, one-level-deep reference: "For detailed guidance, examples, and constraints, see [references/014-agile-user-story.md]", which exists and contains that material without further nesting. This matches the clear-overview anchor.

Specificity

"Guides the creation of agile user stories" names the domain and one concrete action, but the description does not mention the interactive questionnaire, the Markdown artifact generation, or the INVEST validation that the skill actually performs, so coverage is not comprehensive. It is above anchor 2 (the action is concrete, not generic) but below anchor 4 (only one specific action is listed).

Completeness

It explicitly answers both what ("Guides the creation of agile user stories") and when ("Use when the user wants to create a user story. This should trigger for requests such as...") with concrete trigger phrases, matching the anchor-5 example structure exactly. The trigger guidance is explicit, so the cap of 3 for missing 'Use when' does not apply.

Trigger Term Quality

The description lists natural phrases users would actually say — "Create a user story; Write a user story; I need to write a user story; Split feature requirements into user stories" — giving good coverage. It misses common variations such as plural "user stories", "acceptance criteria", or "story card", so it does not reach comprehensive anchor 5.

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

The triggers are tightly clustered around a clear niche — user story creation and splitting feature requirements into user stories — with minimal overlap risk against adjacent writing or agile skills. Requests like "write a user story" would unambiguously match this skill and not a generic document skill.