Conciseness

The ~1750-line body extensively explains standard concepts Claude already knows: Nielsen's 10 heuristics, Gestalt principles, Fitts's and Hick's Laws, Miller's Law, WCAG POUR, cognitive load theory, SUS/NPS/CSAT definitions, plus 15 product case studies with padded metrics. This matches anchor 1 ('Severely verbose; extensively explains concepts Claude already knows; heavily padded') and adds almost nothing Claude cannot already produce.

Actionability

There are genuinely concrete details scattered throughout — the 4.5:1 contrast ratio, 44×44/48×48 touch targets, the SUS scoring formula and questionnaire, the ARIA landmarks code block, and participant-count guidance — but the bulk is descriptive principle explanation rather than executable instruction. This sits between anchor 2 (minimal concrete guidance) and anchor 4 (mostly executable guidance), landing at 3: some concrete guidance but incomplete as a working reference.

Workflow Clarity

Several processes are clearly numbered (usability testing: planning → conducting → analysis → reporting; journey mapping's 8-step creation process; A/B testing best practices), giving a real sequence. However, checkpoints are implicit — e.g., tree testing says "test again until success rates acceptable" with no validate/fix/retry loop — matching anchor 3 ('Steps listed but validation gaps; checkpoints missing or implicit'). No destructive or batch operations are involved, so the cap does not apply.

Progressive Disclosure

The entire skill is one monolithic 1750-line file with no bundle files in references/, scripts/, or assets/, and the body points to nothing external. Content that clearly belongs in separate files — the full heuristics reference, the WCAG details, the 15 examples, the metrics catalog — is all inlined, matching anchor 2 ('content that clearly belongs in separate files is inlined'). It avoids anchor 1 only because section headers provide navigable structure.

Specificity

The description is a list of domain topic nouns — "User research, usability heuristics, user psychology, accessibility, inclusive design, user testing, and UX metrics" — with no action verbs describing what the skill actually does. It names the domain clearly but the actions are absent, matching anchor 2 ('Names the domain but actions are minimal or generic'); it does not reach anchor 3, which requires 1-2 concrete actions.

Completeness

The 'what' is conveyed through the topic list, but there is no 'Use when...' clause or equivalent trigger guidance anywhere in the description, which caps completeness at 3 per the judging guidelines. It fits anchor 3 ('Has a clear what but when is missing or only weakly implied') rather than anchor 4, which requires both what and when.

Trigger Term Quality

Terms like "user research", "usability", "user testing", "accessibility", and "UX metrics" are natural phrases users would say, giving good keyword coverage across the domain. It falls short of anchor 5 because common variations such as "user experience", "usability testing", "personas", or "wireframes" are missing.

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

The UX focus (user research, usability heuristics, UX metrics) is a fairly distinct niche with low conflict risk against unrelated skills. It is not a 5 because broad terms like "accessibility" and "user testing" could also trigger front-end development or QA/testing skills.