Conciseness

The body is dense and largely avoids lecturing about Python basics, but rationale restatements like 'This ensures imports are consistently ordered, enabling clean merges' and the 'Why This Matters' section are mild over-explanation Claude could infer.

Actionability

Copy-paste-ready code blocks (naming, type hints, correct/wrong __all__) and concrete commands ('uv run ruff format .', 'uv run ruff check --fix .') plus a TOML snippet enabling RUF022 cover the common cases fully.

Workflow Clarity

The 'When Adding to Shared Files' section gives a coherent numbered sequence, but the batch file mutations 'ruff check --fix .' and 'ruff format .' have no validation gate (e.g. review the diff, run tests), so the destructive/batch cap of 3 applies.

Progressive Disclosure

No bundle files exist and the body is well organized with clear section headers; the detailed 'Merge-Friendly Patterns' subsection is beyond the under-50-line simple-skill exception and could be externalized, keeping it at 4 rather than 5.

Specificity

Names the domain and enumerates scope ('PEP standards, type hints, docstrings, modern patterns') but the only action verb is the generic 'enforcement'; no concrete enforcement actions are listed, so it sits at the domain-plus-enumeration level rather than comprehensive.

Completeness

Both 'what' (style enforcement) and 'when' ('Auto-loads when writing or reviewing Python code') are present with explicit trigger guidance, but the trigger phrasing is framed as an auto-load mechanism rather than rich concrete trigger phrases.

Trigger Term Quality

'writing or reviewing Python code' provides two genuinely natural user phrasings and 'Python code' is a common trigger term, though synonyms like '.py files', 'Python scripts', 'PEP 8', 'linting', or 'ruff' are absent.

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

Python-specific style enforcement is a fairly clear niche, but 'writing or reviewing Python code' is broad enough to overlap with general-purpose Python skills, preventing a clear-distinctive 5.