Conciseness

The body is lean and assumes competence: no explanation of what versioning is, no library comparisons, no padding — every line is an instruction, an exclusion, or a file path. Matches the "every token earns its place" anchor.

Actionability

Concrete guidance throughout: an exact 11-file list, an explicit example ("0.4.11 → 0.4.12"), a runnable command ("cd cli && uv lock"), and explicit exclusions ("Do NOT change version strings in *.lock files or Cargo.lock"). Not 5 because the core edit operation is left implicit — the expected version-string format per file (e.g., `__version__ = "0.4.11"` in `__init__.py` vs. `version: 0.4.11` in CI YAML) is never shown, so each replacement requires discovery.

Workflow Clarity

The sequence is clear (resolve version, with user confirmation when auto-incrementing → update all files → run `uv lock` → show summary), but this is a batch operation across 11 files with no validation step to catch missed or malformed replacements (e.g., grep for the old version afterwards). Per the rubric guideline, a batch workflow without validation/verification is capped at 3.

Progressive Disclosure

The skill is under 50 lines, single-purpose, and needs no external references; the body is organized into clearly separated concerns (argument handling, file list, exclusions, lockfile update, summary) with no monolithic wall of text and no buried references. Per the rubric's simple-skill guideline, this qualifies for 5.

Specificity

"Bump the Plano version across all required files" names the domain (Plano versioning) and one concrete action (bump version), but stops short of listing the fuller set of concrete actions (update files, refresh lockfile). Not 4 because only a single action is named rather than several specific actions; not 2 because the action is concrete rather than generic.

Completeness

The 'what' is clear (bump the Plano version across all required files) and the 'when' is explicit ("Use when preparing a release"), so it avoids the 3 cap for a missing trigger clause. Not 5 because the 'when' is a single brief condition and could name more concrete trigger situations (e.g., publishing, cutting a version).

Trigger Term Quality

"version", "bump", "release", "preparing a release" are natural phrases a user would say when needing this skill. Not 5 because common synonyms like "publish", "cut a release", or "new version" are absent; not 3 because the included terms are natural user phrasings, not jargon.

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

"Plano" scopes the skill to a specific named project, making it clearly distinguishable from generic versioning or release skills; minimal conflict risk. Confirmed not below 5, as the anchor example of a clear niche with distinct triggers is the closest match.