Conciseness

The ~30-line body is lean: it states what the template is ("HTML + CSS + GSAP motion composition, bundled under `source/`", "MP4 / WEBM at 16:9, default 20s, 30fps"), a 4-step workflow, and attribution — no explanations of concepts Claude already knows and no padding. Every section earns its place, so it clearly matches the 'lean and efficient' anchor rather than score 4's 'minor instances of over-explanation'.

Actionability

Guidance is directionally concrete — named files ("Read `source/index.html`"), a specific edit rule ("Replace the sample copy (headlines, figures, labels)... keep the motion timing and visual signature intact") — but no executable commands are given: the render step is only "Render to MP4 via the html-video / HyperFrames renderer" with no command, script, or flag, and there is no pointer to where in index.html the sample copy lives. This matches 'some concrete guidance but incomplete; missing key details', below score 4's 'concrete code or commands with minor gaps'.

Workflow Clarity

The four steps are clearly sequenced (read → replace copy → keep self-contained → render) with a concrete preservation rule at step 2 and a constraint at step 3. It is below score 5 because there is no validation or verification checkpoint (e.g., confirming the render output duration/fps or spot-checking scenes), and above score 3 because the sequence is well-defined and each step is specific rather than merely listed.

Progressive Disclosure

The body is short and well organized into 'What this template is', 'Workflow', and 'Attribution', pointing to `source/index.html` as the one level of depth for detail — good structure for a compact skill. It is below score 5 because the referenced bundle path (`source/`) is not present alongside the SKILL.md, so the reference cannot be verified and no navigation over the bundle's files (e.g., what else lives under `source/`) is provided.

Specificity

The description names the domain concretely ("Multi-scene product showcase with SVG assets", "HyperFrames motion video") and characterizes the deliverable, but lists no concrete action verbs (create, render, customize) — comparable to 'names domain and 1-2 concrete actions, not comprehensive'. It is above score 2 because the artifact type and medium are specified rather than merely generic, and below score 4 because no specific actions or capabilities are enumerated.

Completeness

Both parts are present: 'what' via "Multi-scene product showcase with SVG assets" and an explicit 'when' via "Use this plugin when the user wants a 'Product Promo' HyperFrames motion video". It is not score 5 because the 'when' clause is circular (it triggers on the skill's own name rather than concrete user phrasings) and the 'what' omits what the skill actually does with the template (produce/customize/render the video).

Trigger Term Quality

Natural terms users would say are present: "Product Promo", "product showcase", "motion video", and the platform name "HyperFrames". It falls short of score 5 because common synonyms and phrasings are missing (e.g., 'promo video', 'product video', 'commercial', 'marketing video', 'reel'), and above score 3 because several genuinely natural trigger phrases are included rather than only jargon.

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

The pairing of "Product Promo" with "HyperFrames" gives it a clear niche with low conflict risk against unrelated skills. It is below score 5 because within the HyperFrames family, a generic request like 'make a promo video' could match sibling templates, and 'product showcase' is a moderately common phrase; it is above score 3 because the platform qualifier keeps it well distinguished from generic video skills.