Conciseness

Every line is a terse constraint or command with concrete numbers ("50–60 chars", "150–160 chars", "1200×630 px", "under 3 s", "above 50,000 URLs or 50 MB"); there is zero padding and no explanation of concepts Claude already knows. This matches 'lean and efficient; assumes Claude's competence; every token earns its place' — not 4, since no section could be trimmed.

Actionability

The body provides a copy-paste-ready inspection command ("curl -s https://example.com/page | pup 'script[type=application/ld+json] text{}' | jq ."), exact validation criteria ("must return 0 errors from Google's Rich Results Test... before shipping"), a concrete robots.txt directive ("Sitemap: https://example.com/sitemap.xml"), and specific Disallow entries. This matches 'fully executable; copy-paste ready code or commands' — not 4, since there are no gaps in the guidance the body sets out to give.

Workflow Clarity

Explicit validation checkpoints exist (Rich Results Test must return 0 errors before shipping; post-deploy Search Console check with a fix-and-resubmit loop), matching 'clear sequence with most checkpoints present; minor validation gaps'. It is not 5 because the body is organized by topic rather than as a sequenced workflow — the implement→validate→deploy→monitor order must be inferred across sections.

Progressive Disclosure

This is a single-file skill under 50 lines with no bundle directories; sections (Constraints, Structured Data, Sitemap & robots.txt) are well-organized and no content belongs in a separate file. Per the rubric's simple-skill guideline, this earns the top anchor — there are no buried or nested references to penalize.

Specificity

"Implements technical SEO: meta tags, JSON-LD structured data, sitemaps, crawlability fixes" lists several concrete, specific actions rather than generic language, matching the 'several specific actions; minor gaps in coverage' anchor. It falls short of 5 because some capabilities surfaced only as triggers (canonical URLs, Open Graph tags) are not named as actions in the 'what' clause; it is well above 3, which requires only 1-2 concrete actions.

Completeness

Both parts are explicit: the 'what' is "Implements technical SEO: meta tags, JSON-LD structured data, sitemaps, crawlability fixes" and the 'when' is "Use when adding schema markup, JSON-LD, robots.txt updates, canonical URLs, Open Graph tags, or improving crawlability", with concrete trigger phrases. This matches the top anchor exactly — not 4, since the 'when' clause is specific and enumerates triggers rather than being merely adequate.

Trigger Term Quality

"schema markup, JSON-LD, robots.txt updates, canonical URLs, Open Graph tags, or improving crawlability" covers good natural keywords users would actually say, matching 'good keyword coverage; a few natural terms missing'. Not 5: common variations like 'rich snippets', 'structured data', or 'search rankings' are absent; clearly above 3, which requires notable gaps in synonyms.

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

The description occupies a clear technical-SEO niche with distinct, unambiguous triggers (robots.txt, canonical URLs, OG tags, JSON-LD) that would rarely fire the wrong skill. It matches 'clear niche with distinct triggers; minimal conflict risk' — only a generic web-development skill could marginally overlap, which does not lower it to 4.