Conciseness

The body is lean and efficient — it gives the format spec, terse notes, and a short numbered workflow without explaining git or commit concepts Claude already knows, so every token earns its place.

Actionability

It provides concrete, executable commands (`git status`, `git diff`, `git log -n 50 --pretty=format:%s`, `git commit -m "<subject>"`) plus a precise format specification, making the guidance copy-paste ready.

Workflow Clarity

The numbered Steps give a clear sequence with an explicit clarification checkpoint ('If there are ambiguous extra files, ask the user for clarification before committing'); this is not a destructive/batch operation requiring a validate-fix-retry loop, so no cap applies.

Progressive Disclosure

This is a single-purpose skill under 50 lines with no external references, and the content is organized into clearly labeled sections (Format, Notes, Steps); per the simple-skills scoring note this can score 3 without external file references.

Specificity

The description 'Read this skill before making git commits' names no concrete capabilities — it is a meta-instruction to read the skill rather than a statement of what the skill does, matching the 'vague or no actions' anchor.

Completeness

It fails to answer 'what does this do' (saying 'read this skill' instead of describing actions), and there is no explicit 'Use when...' clause; per the guideline a missing trigger clause caps completeness at 2, and the 'what' is effectively absent.

Trigger Term Quality

'making git commits' is a natural phrase a user might say, but coverage is thin with no variations (e.g., 'commit', 'commit message', 'stage changes'), so it only partially matches the natural-keyword anchor.

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

'making git commits' is somewhat specific to a version-control niche but the description is generic enough to overlap with other git/version skills, so it sits at the 'somewhat specific but could overlap' anchor.