Conciseness

The body is dense and earns most of its tokens (exact jq selectors, per-CLI resume commands, a symptom-cause-fix taxonomy), but the Rules section restates content repeated in Step-by-step — fail-closed (rule 4 vs step 1), capability cross-check (rule 5 vs step 3), and quote-don't-paraphrase (rule 3 vs step 9). Not 5 because those duplications could be trimmed; not 3 because there is no generic-concept padding and every section is project-specific.

Actionability

Fully executable guidance: copy-paste jq histogram commands for both codex and claude transcript formats, `find <run-dir> -name '*.jsonl'`, per-CLI resume commands with environment setup, and a complete verbatim report template with citation format.

Workflow Clarity

Nine explicitly sequenced steps with validation checkpoints throughout: fail closed on a missing artefact kind, histogram printed BEFORE hypothesis formation, claim-vs-transcript cross-checking, mandatory two-copy snapshot diff, and re-derivation of the verdict to catch judge calibration drift. The skill is read-only, so the destructive-operation cap does not apply.

Progressive Disclosure

Clear, navigable sections (Why, Rules, Inputs, Step-by-step, taxonomy, Output template) in a single file with no buried references. Not 5 because the ~330-line body inlines the failure-mode taxonomy and the full report template — content that could sit in one-level-deep reference files; not 3 because the structure is well-organized and the split is a minor, defensible choice (both are needed on every invocation).

Specificity

The description lists multiple concrete actions — 'Reads the judge's rendering, the raw transcript, the primitive the agent saw and the scenario, then reports a classified diagnosis without fixing' — covering the skill's behavior comprehensively in third person.

Completeness

It explicitly answers both questions: 'Use when a judged benchmark or acceptance scenario fails and you need the cause before editing' (when) and the artefact-reading plus classified-diagnosis-report behavior (what), with concrete trigger phrases.

Trigger Term Quality

'Use when a judged benchmark or acceptance scenario fails' provides good natural trigger phrases, but common synonyms a user might say ('test failure', 'failed run', 'why did this run fail') are absent. Not 5 because anchor 5 requires comprehensive synonyms/extensions; not 3 because existing keyword coverage is strong and domain-accurate.

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

A clear niche — diagnosing failed judged benchmark runs — with distinct triggers ('judged benchmark', 'acceptance scenario fails', 'classified diagnosis') that no general skill would claim; minimal conflict risk.