Conciseness

The body is lean and operational — executable git commands, table templates, and short guarded instructions with no explanation of concepts Claude already knows. Minor trimming is possible: the "Safety Measures", "Quick Reference", and "The Bottom Line" sections largely restate the inline steps and core principle, keeping it at anchor 4 rather than 5.

Actionability

Guidance is almost entirely copy-paste ready: exact git commands, the literal confirmation token "ROLLBACK", a deterministic tag-naming format, and concrete output templates. The small gap is that $CHECKPOINT_TAG is used in commands without an explicit step binding it to the tag parsed from the user's request, matching anchor 4 rather than 5.

Workflow Clarity

The destructive rollback flow is clearly sequenced across eight numbered steps with explicit validation gates: tag-existence check with a hard STOP ("Do not proceed"), a diff preview shown before confirmation, a mandatory exact-word confirmation, and a safety checkpoint created before any file change. Error recovery (tag not found → show available checkpoints) is handled, matching anchor 5; since validation is present, the destructive-operation cap of 3 does not apply.

Progressive Disclosure

The skill is self-contained with well-labeled sections (two modes, numbered steps, reference tables) and no nested-reference chains; the single external pointer ("see skills/blocks/codex-host-adapter.md") is clearly signaled. At ~265 lines, supporting material like the checkpoint tag-format reference could be split into a reference file, which keeps this at anchor 4 rather than 5.

Specificity

The description names one concrete action — "Roll back to a previous checkpoint via git" — which sits at anchor 3 (domain plus 1-2 concrete actions), but the trigger clause uses second person ("when... you need to revert"), which the guidelines penalize by reducing specificity by 1. It also omits the skill's other concrete capabilities (listing checkpoints, previewing affected files, creating safety checkpoints), so it is not comprehensive.

Completeness

It explicitly answers both questions: the what is "Roll back to a previous checkpoint via git" and the when is "use when a change went wrong and you need to revert" — a concrete, natural trigger phrase. This matches anchor 5; anchor 4 would require the 'when' to be vague or only implicit, which it is not.

Trigger Term Quality

Natural trigger terms are present — "roll back", "checkpoint", "revert", "a change went wrong" — phrases a user would plausibly say when they need this skill. A few common synonyms ("undo", "restore", "go back to") and the concrete tag pattern are missing, matching anchor 4 rather than 5.

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

The checkpoint-rollback niche with git-specific framing is mostly distinct from other skills, but "revert" and "rollback" are broad git terms that could overlap with generic git-undo or version-control skills, matching anchor 4. It is clearly above anchor 3 because the checkpoint framing is not generically applicable.