Conciseness

The body is efficient and API-specific with no filler (auth header, endpoint, one parameter, one response example, one worked curl). Two minor trims exist: the opening paragraph restates the frontmatter description almost verbatim, and "Key fields for agents" re-annotates fields already shown in the JSON. Not a 5 because of that duplication; not a 3 because there is no over-explanation of concepts Claude already knows.

Actionability

Fully executable guidance: exact URL "GET https://api.worldmonitor.app/api/resilience/v1/get-resilience-score", required header "X-WorldMonitor-Key" with a realistic key format, parameter shape, and a copy-paste-ready curl|jq worked example covering the common single-country case. Error codes with causes complete the picture; no gaps remain for a fetch skill.

Workflow Clarity

This is a simple single-task skill (one authenticated GET with one required parameter) and the single action is unambiguous; the rubric's simple-skill exception applies. It is read-only, so the destructive/batch validation cap does not apply, and the Errors section plus "When NOT to use" (pointing N-call loops to GetResilienceRanking) supply recovery and anti-batch guidance.

Progressive Disclosure

Well-organized labeled sections (Authentication, Endpoint, Parameters, Response shape, Errors, When NOT to use, References) with one-level-deep, clearly signaled external links (OpenAPI, auth matrix, methodology); no bundle files exist, and nothing is nested or buried. Not a 5: the body is ~100 lines, above the under-50-line threshold where organization alone earns a 5, and the inlined full response JSON with a separate key-fields list is a minor split opportunity.

Specificity

"Retrieve the composite country resilience score (0-100) and its domain/pillar breakdown for a single country" names the domain plus several specific, quantified actions (score, domain/pillar breakdown, and trend in the trigger clause). Not a 5 because coverage stays at the retrieve-verb level and omits other returnable facets (confidence interval, level bucket); not a 3 because it goes beyond the anchor's minimal 1-2 generic actions with concrete, bounded data objects.

Completeness

Both halves are explicit: what — "Retrieve the composite country resilience score (0-100) and its domain/pillar breakdown for a single country"; when — "Use when the user asks how resilient a country is, or wants its numeric resilience score, trend, or per-domain breakdown" with concrete trigger phrases. Matches the anchor-5 example's structure exactly; a 4 would require the 'when' to be less explicit, which it is not.

Trigger Term Quality

Natural phrases a user would actually say are present: "how resilient a country is", "numeric resilience score", "trend", "per-domain breakdown". Not a 5 because common synonyms/variants are missing (e.g. "country stability", "vulnerability", phrasing by country name); well above a 3, which would lack the natural question form "how resilient a country is".

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

"Country resilience score", "how resilient a country is", and "per-domain breakdown" form a clear niche with distinct triggers; the body further disambiguates against ranking and country-brief skills. Not a 4: no meaningful overlap with neighboring skills is left — the trigger vocabulary is unique to this endpoint.