Conciseness

Dense and operational throughout — it assumes competence (no explaining what git, TDD, or worktrees are) and nearly every sentence is a rule or its rationale. Minor duplication exists (the four stop-conditions appear twice, 'the only fresh context bought' is repeated, and the 13-row rationalization table is long), matching anchor 4's 'minor instances that could be trimmed' rather than anchor 5's fully lean text.

Actionability

Fully executable guidance: exact script invocations with argument shapes ('scripts/task-start PLAN_FILE N', 'scripts/task-done PLAN_FILE N BASE -- <测试命令>', '../subagent-driven-development/scripts/review-package PLAN_FILE MERGE_BASE HEAD'), exact ledger-line and ruling formats, and a complete worked example workflow covering the common path including a mid-plan ruling.

Workflow Clarity

The whole process is sequenced twice over (dot-graph plus prose phases) with validation checkpoints at every gate: Expected-output three-way dispatch, the completion contract checklist, task-done recording only on green, final-review regrading, and fix-round verification via RED→GREEN plus full-suite green — anchor 5's 'explicit validation steps, feedback loops, checklists' with the destructive workspace-deletion step properly gated.

Progressive Disclosure

The bundle's two scripts (task-start, task-done) exist and are correctly referenced with usage; sections are clear and cross-skill references are one level deep and well-signaled. Some long runtime-critical material (the 13-row rationalization table, the example workflow) is inlined in SKILL.md where a references/ file could carry it — minor organization gaps per anchor 4.

Specificity

The description names one composite action ('在当前会话里亲自担任实现者执行一份实现计划' with inline mode qualifiers) but lists no further concrete capabilities — anchor 3 territory. It is written in second person ('当你要…时使用'), and the rubric mandates reducing the specificity score by 1 for second-person voice, yielding 2.

Completeness

Both 'what' (personally execute an implementation plan inline as the implementer) and 'when' (two explicit triggers: partner chose inline execution, or no subagent tools available) are present, with the 'when' more explicit than anchor 4's example. The 'what' is a single terse clause rather than a list of concrete actions, falling between anchors 4 and 5.

Trigger Term Quality

Good natural keyword coverage for this niche: '内联执行' (inline execution), '实现计划' (implementation plan), '子智能体' (subagent), '当前会话' — terms a user or handoff would actually say. A few natural variants like '自己执行'/'亲自实现' are missing, so not anchor 5.

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

The two trigger conditions explicitly disambiguate from the closely related subagent-driven-development skill, but '执行一份实现计划' remains shared trigger territory with it — mostly distinct with minor overlap risk, matching anchor 4 rather than anchor 5's minimal-conflict niche.