Quotes 'Eager load with `with()` to prevent N+1 queries' and 'retry_after must exceed job timeout; use exponential backoff [1, 5, 10]' show lean, dense rules that assume Laravel competence with no concept-padding. Matches the score-3 anchor; not a 2 because there is no unnecessary explanation or fluff to tighten — every bullet is a concrete best practice.

Quotes name concrete APIs ('`with()`', '`Cache::remember()`', '`ShouldBeUnique`', '`php artisan make:migration`', '`constrained()`'), but there are no complete executable code blocks and the body defers syntax ('For exact API syntax, verify with `search-docs`'). Matches score 2 (concrete guidance but incomplete, missing key details); not 3 because nothing is copy-paste ready, not 1 because real specific APIs are named rather than vague direction.

Quotes '1. Identify the file type and select relevant sections', '2. Check sibling files for existing patterns', '3. Verify API syntax with `search-docs`' give a present sequence, but there are no validation checkpoints despite destructive/batch operations in scope (migrations: 'Never modify migrations that have run in production'). Matches score 2 (steps listed but validation gaps, checkpoints implicit); not 3 because no feedback loops, not 1 because a clear 3-step sequence exists.

Quotes '### 1. Database Performance → `rules/db-performance.md`' (repeated across 19 sections) and 'Always use a sub-agent to read rule files' show well-signaled one-level-deep references, but the referenced `rules/*.md` files are absent from the bundle (no rules/, references/, scripts/, or assets/ directories exist), so navigation leads nowhere and the overview carries all real content. Matches score 2 (some structure, references present but content that should be separate is effectively inline); not 3 because the detail files are missing and disclosure is broken, not 1 because it is not a monolithic wall and references are one level deep and clearly labeled.

Quotes 'writing, reviewing, or refactoring Laravel PHP code' and 'creating or modifying controllers, models, migrations, form requests, policies, jobs, scheduled commands, service classes, and Eloquent queries' list multiple specific concrete actions, matching the score-3 anchor. It is not a 2 because the action enumeration is comprehensive rather than naming only the domain and a few actions.

Quotes 'Apply this skill whenever writing, reviewing, or refactoring Laravel PHP code' and 'Also use for Laravel code reviews and refactoring existing Laravel code to follow best practices' provide explicit when-triggers, while the enumerated components answer what. Clearly answers both what AND when with explicit triggers, matching score 3; not a 2 because the when is explicit, not merely implied.

Quotes 'N+1 and query performance issues', 'caching strategies', 'authorization and security patterns', 'validation, error handling, queue and job configuration, route definitions', and 'Laravel code reviews' give good coverage of natural terms a Laravel developer would actually say. Not a 2 because common variations across many Laravel domains are present rather than a few scattered keywords.

Quotes 'Laravel PHP code', 'Eloquent queries', and 'form requests, policies, jobs, scheduled commands' establish a clear Laravel-specific niche with distinct triggers unlikely to fire for non-Laravel skills. Not a 2 because the heavy framework-specific terminology sharply distinguishes it from generic PHP or code-review skills.