Conciseness

The ~35-line body is lean and dense: "ALTER TABLE x ENABLE ROW LEVEL SECURITY; on every table — default-deny, explicit-allow" and "Generate with `openssl rand -hex 32`; rotate quarterly" assume Claude's competence with zero padding. Every token earns its place.

Actionability

Mostly executable guidance: concrete SQL ("ALTER TABLE x ENABLE ROW LEVEL SECURITY"), a copy-paste header ("authorization: Bearer ${process.env.CRON_SECRET}"), a CI assertion query, and specific commands ("openssl rand -hex 32", "curl -I"). Not 5 because "EXISTS subqueries for role checks" and "see deployment customization" lack any code example or file path.

Workflow Clarity

Organized by topic rather than a multi-step sequence, but each section carries explicit validation: "CI gate: assert `SELECT relrowsecurity FROM pg_class...` plus a positive/negative row-visibility test... Block merges on failure", "Validate shipped headers with `curl -I`", and the 401 check on cron routes. Not 5 because no unified sequenced workflow with feedback loops; not 3 because validation checkpoints are explicitly present.

Progressive Disclosure

Under 50 lines with no bundle files, the well-organized sections (Authentication, CSP, RLS, API Security) satisfy the simple-skill exception. Deferrals are clearly signaled and one level deep: "SQL examples and role system: see the **database** skill" in a blockquote, plus named cross-references to api-patterns and session-checkpoints.

Specificity

"Security architecture: authentication, authorization, RLS policies, CSP, input validation, API security" lists several specific capability areas with comprehensive coverage, but they are domain nouns rather than the concrete action verbs of the anchor-5 example ("Extract text and tables... fill forms, merge documents").

Completeness

Explicitly answers both what ("Security architecture: authentication, authorization, RLS policies, CSP, input validation, API security") and when ("Use when implementing auth flows, writing RLS policies, configuring CSP/headers, validating inputs, or auditing security") with concrete trigger phrases.

Trigger Term Quality

"Trigger terms: RLS, CSP, Server Actions, Zod, auth flow" plus "auth flows, RLS policies, CSP/headers, validating inputs, auditing security" gives good keyword coverage users would naturally say, but misses common synonyms like "row-level security" spelled out, "login", or "permissions".

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

Stack-specific triggers (RLS, CSP, Zod, Server Actions) carve out a clear security niche with minimal overlap risk; generic terms like "input validation" are anchored by the surrounding specific vocabulary. Not 4 because the enumerated trigger set is as distinct as the anchor-5 example's PDF-specific terms.