The body is lean and assumes Claude's competence — it never explains what a diff, git restore, or GenUI is, and every section earns its place; this matches the 'lean and efficient; every token earns its place' anchor rather than the padded score-2 case.

It gives concrete, executable guidance — exact output paths, the decision.json schema, 'git restore' for rollback, and named implementation files (diff-review.ts, diff-review-genui-bridge.ts); for an instruction/contract skill the rubric does not penalize absence of code when guidance is this specific, so it reaches the fully-actionable anchor.

The sequence (render diff → surface choice → capture decision → persist or rollback) is clear and anchored by an explicit completion checkpoint ('completes when decision.json has a non-empty decision'); this is a review/capture atom rather than a destructive batch op, so the feedback-loop cap does not apply, and it sits at the clear-sequence-with-checkpoints anchor.

Under 50 lines, self-contained with well-organized sections (Inputs, Output, Convergence, Anti-patterns, Status) and no external bundle files; the simple-skill scoring note allows a score of 3 with just well-organized sections, which this satisfies.

Lists three concrete actions — 'Render the patch-edit run's accumulated changes as a reviewable diff', 'surface it through a GenUI choice surface', and 'persist the user's accept / reject decision into the artifact manifest' — matching the multiple-specific-actions anchor at score 3 rather than the partial domain-only score 2.

The 'what' is explicit and strong, but the 'when' is entirely missing — there is no 'Use when...' clause or equivalent trigger guidance, which per the judging guidelines caps completeness at 2; it is not the score-1 case that lacks both, and not the score-3 case that states an explicit trigger.

It has real keywords ('diff', 'accept / reject decision') but leans on project jargon ('patch-edit run', 'GenUI choice surface', 'artifact manifest') and omits common natural variations a user would say; not the no-natural-keywords score 1, but short of the broad natural-term coverage at score 3.

The niche (reviewable diff surfaced via GenUI choice with manifest persistence) is reasonably distinct and unlikely to trigger for the wrong skill, but the triggers are not framed in a way that sharply separates it from sibling review atoms, so it sits at 'somewhat specific but could still overlap' rather than the clearly-distinct score 3.