Conciseness

Lean and efficient throughout — every line is directive ("Write a concise, specific title.", "Never fabricate a URL, identity, field value, or technical detail.") with zero concept explanations or padding, fully assuming Claude's competence. Anchor 5 fits; there is no over-explanation to justify dropping to 4.

Actionability

Mostly concrete and executable for an instruction-only skill: an enumerated capture checklist (reporter identity, reproduction details, expected/actual behavior, diagnostic URLs, attachments), a preferred description section order, and a specific verification list. It falls short of anchor 5 only because tools are referenced generically ("Use the configured Linear MCP tools") without naming any, and no example title/description is provided; it is well above anchor 3's pseudocode-level vagueness.

Workflow Clarity

Clear three-phase sequence (Before writing → Create or update → Verify) with an explicit verification checklist ("title and description reflect the request… source links remain present… reporter/requester attribution is retained") and a feedback loop ("Fix omissions before reporting completion"). This matches anchor 5's explicit validation and error-recovery pattern; it is not 4 because checkpoints and the fix-before-complete loop are fully present, and no destructive/batch cap applies.

Progressive Disclosure

A single-file, ~50-line skill with well-organized sections, no bundle files, no inlined content that belongs in a separate file, and no dangling references. Per the rubric's simple-skill note, well-organized sections alone merit 5 when no external references are needed.

Specificity

Lists several concrete actions — "Create or update high-quality Linear tickets" plus preserving "diagnostic links, attachments, and reporter/requester attribution" — with only minor coverage gaps (e.g., labels/priority handling not mentioned). It exceeds the 1-2-action anchor but is not comprehensively complete, so anchor 4 fits best.

Completeness

Explicitly answers both: what ("Create or update high-quality Linear tickets while preserving the originating report, diagnostic links, attachments, and reporter/requester attribution") and when ("Read this whenever someone asks to create, recreate, or update a Linear issue") with concrete trigger phrases. This matches the anchor-5 pattern exactly; it is not 4 because the when-clause is already explicit and trigger-phrased.

Trigger Term Quality

Natural trigger coverage includes "Linear tickets", "Linear issue", and the verbs "create, recreate, or update" — the product name plus noun and verb synonyms users would actually say. Coverage density matches the anchor-5 example's synonym spread; only marginal variants like "file/open a ticket" are absent and "create" captures that intent.

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

Clear niche (Linear ticketing) with product-specific triggers ("Linear tickets", "Linear issue") that no generic competing skill would match, giving minimal conflict risk. Anchor 5 applies; it is not 4 since no meaningful overlap with related skills exists.