Conciseness

The body is efficient and assumes Claude's competence, but the long enumeration of sources to avoid claiming ('Reddit, X/Twitter, YouTube transcripts...') and the untrusted-evidence note appearing in both Source Coverage Rules and the report's Evidence Note are minor instances that could be trimmed. It is not a 5 because of that redundancy, and not a 3 because the writing is largely lean rather than padded.

Actionability

Provides a copy-paste engine command and a concrete Markdown report-contract scaffold with an explicit output path. It is not a 5 because derivation of '<safe-topic-slug>' is unspecified and the synthesis step is described abstractly, and not a 3 because the runnable command and full report template are concrete and executable.

Workflow Clarity

Seven clearly sequenced steps with an engine-failure fallback checkpoint and explicit source-status labeling. It is not a 5 because there is no explicit validate->fix->retry feedback loop after report writing, and not a 3 because the sequence and fallback checkpoint are well defined rather than gap-laden.

Progressive Disclosure

Clear overview body with a well-signaled one-level-deep reference ('load references/save-html-brief.md'), which is a real file, with content appropriately split so the optional HTML flow stays out of the main path. It is not a 4 because the single reference is cleanly signaled and navigation is straightforward.

Specificity

Names the domain ('Recent community and social trend research over the last 30 days') and conveys concrete research facets (sentiment, community reactions, trend scan), but the single verb 'research' keeps actions from being comprehensive. It is not a 2 because the domain is well specified and the research scope is concrete, and not a 4 because no multiple distinct action verbs are listed.

Completeness

Explicitly answers both what ('Recent community and social trend research over the last 30 days') and when ('Use when the brief asks...') with concrete trigger phrases. It is not a 4 because the 'when' is fully explicit with named trigger conditions, not merely adequate.

Trigger Term Quality

Comprehensive natural terms ('what people are saying now, recent sentiment, community reactions, social proof, launch reaction, trend scan') plus synonyms ('last 30 days'/'last30days'/'last-30-days context') and Chinese variants in the triggers list. It is not a 4 because coverage of natural phrasings and synonyms is thorough rather than merely good.

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

Clear niche (last-30-days community/social trend research) with distinct triggers and minimal overlap with general research skills. It is not a 4 because the time-boxed community-sentiment framing makes the niche sharply distinguishable rather than only 'mostly distinct'.