Conciseness

Mostly dense and efficient (tables, checklists, decision trees, assumes AWS competence), but the seven-mode list is duplicated in full between the Interactive Wizard and Activation sections, and time-sensitive version pins (">= 1.7.0", "TLSv1.2_2021") sit in the main flow rather than a deprecated/old-patterns section. Not 4 because the duplication is a noticeable tightening opportunity, not a minor one; not 2 because there is no conceptual padding or explanation of things Claude already knows.

Actionability

Largely concrete and executable: a Terraform resource table, a complete SCP JSON policy, an AFT module block, the `aws iam simulate-custom-policy` command, and a Functions-vs-Lambda@Edge decision tree. Not 5 because the WAF baseline rule-group block is a Terraform fragment (`rate_based_statement { limit = 2000; ... }` is not valid HCL), the "Provide: problem diagnosis, Terraform snippet, validation steps, rollback plan" steps direct without giving a template, and both `references/` paths are dead.

Workflow Clarity

Each mode has a numbered sequence, with real checkpoints: "Count first, monitor 24–48h, then Block" and "Validate SCP effect before attaching" (with a simulate command). Not 5 because there are no error-recovery loops (e.g. what to do on `WAFInvalidParameterException`), the review mode's input-gathering is only sketched, and the terraform mode's "Non-negotiable patterns in every generated module:" heading is truncated with no content following it.

Progressive Disclosure

The body is well-sectioned with clearly signaled references ("**Reference:** `references/aws-cloudfront.md`"), but neither referenced file exists — the bundle contains no references/, scripts/, or assets/ directories — so the primary navigation paths are broken. Additionally, reference-grade material (full SCP JSON, OU design tables, AFT module, provider-pinning patterns) is inlined in a ~400-line SKILL.md rather than split out. Not 2 because the in-body structure and mode organization are genuinely good; not 4 because dead reference links are a real navigation defect.

Specificity

Names many concrete capabilities ("AWS CloudFront distributions, WAF web ACLs, Lambda@Edge, CloudFront Functions, Firewall Manager multi-account enforcement", "OAC, cache policies, security headers, managed rule groups, rate limiting"), but frames them as topics ('Structured guidance for', 'Covers') rather than actions, and the "IAM/IRSA patterns" claim is not substantiated by the skill body. Not 5 because it is topic enumeration rather than comprehensive concrete actions, and the IRSA claim is an over-claim.

Completeness

The 'what' is clear (structured guidance across the listed AWS domains), but there is no 'Use when...' clause or equivalent explicit trigger guidance — per the rubric this caps completeness at 3. Not 2 because the 'what' is specific and multi-faceted, not vague.

Trigger Term Quality

Contains natural terms users would say — CloudFront, WAF, web ACL, Lambda@Edge, Firewall Manager, OAC, rate limiting, Terraform. Not 5 because common synonyms and phrasings like "CDN", "edge functions", and "bot control" are missing.

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

Clear niche with distinct triggers (CloudFront, WAF, Lambda@Edge, FMS) that minimal other skills would match. Not 5 because the "IAM/IRSA patterns" mention overlaps with general IAM/Kubernetes skills and is unsupported by the body, creating minor wrong-trigger risk.