Conciseness

The body is a lean quick-reference: dense tables of project-specific facts Claude cannot know (MCP tool semantics, resource URIs, graph node/edge types) with no padding or explanations of general concepts. Every line carries information Claude does not already have.

Actionability

Concrete, copy-paste-ready items are given: exact resource URIs ('gitnexus://repo/{name}/context'), an exact CLI command ('node .gitnexus/run.cjs analyze'), and a runnable Cypher query. Not 5: no example of actually invoking an MCP tool with its parameters, and the '{name}' placeholder resolution is only implicitly covered via list_repos.

Workflow Clarity

'Always Start Here' gives a numbered 3-step entry sequence plus an explicit staleness checkpoint with remediation ('If step 1 warns the index is stale, run node .gitnexus/run.cjs analyze first'). Not 5: only one checkpoint exists — there is no guidance for recovery when a repo is not indexed at all, and the follow-on skill workflows are delegated rather than validated.

Progressive Disclosure

No bundle files (references/, scripts/, assets/) exist, and the ~60-line body is fully self-contained with well-organized sections: entry workflow, task-to-skill dispatch table, tools table, resources table, and schema summary. Per the rubric's simple-skill guidance, well-organized sections with no need for external references earn a 5.

Specificity

It enumerates several concrete coverage areas — 'available tools, how to query the knowledge graph, MCP resources, graph schema, or workflow reference' — naming the domain plus multiple specifics. Not 5: several items are topics rather than concrete actions, and coverage of what the tools actually do (e.g., impact analysis, rename coordination) is not stated.

Completeness

The 'when' is explicit and concrete ('Use when the user asks about GitNexus itself' plus example questions), and the 'what' is conveyed through the enumerated coverage areas. Not 5: the what is a topic list rather than an explicit statement of what the skill does (e.g., 'Reference guide for ...'), so it is stated but less explicitly than the anchor-5 pattern of concrete action verbs plus trigger phrases.

Trigger Term Quality

Natural user phrasings are quoted directly ('"What GitNexus tools are available?"', '"How do I use GitNexus?"') alongside natural trigger keywords like 'asks about GitNexus', 'knowledge graph', and 'graph schema'. These are exactly the utterances a user needing this reference skill would say.

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

The branded trigger 'asks about GitNexus itself' carves out a clear niche — questions about the tooling and schema — that is cleanly distinguishable from the sibling gitnexus-exploring/debugging/refactoring task skills, which trigger on code-analysis work rather than questions about GitNexus. Conflict risk is minimal.