Conciseness

The body is dominated by executable commands, tables, and short directives with almost no explanation of concepts Claude already knows, matching 'Efficient; minor instances of over-explanation that could be trimmed'. It is not 5 because the safety message is repeated across the Safety Measures table, Red Flags table, 'The Bottom Line', and inline CRITICAL notes — some of which could be consolidated.

Actionability

Every step carries a copy-paste-ready bash command (git tag listing, tag validation, diff preview, safety tagging, LESSONS.md preservation, checkout restore), and both modes include concrete example output, matching 'Fully executable; copy-paste ready code or commands; specific examples cover the common cases'. No gaps found.

Workflow Clarity

The ROLLBACK mode is a clearly numbered 8-step sequence with explicit validation checkpoints: tag existence check with a hard STOP on failure, a mandatory confirmation gate, a preview of affected files before any change, and a safety-checkpoint recovery path for undoing the rollback. This matches the top anchor 'Clear sequence with explicit validation steps; feedback loops for error recovery' — notable because it is a destructive operation with strong validation.

Progressive Disclosure

No bundle files exist (references/, scripts/, assets/ are absent), and the body is well-organized with clear section headers, tables, and a quick reference, matching 'Good structure; most content is appropriately placed; minor organization gaps'. It is not 5 because the skill exceeds the simple-skill size threshold, and the tag-format catalog, Quick Reference, and safety-summary tables are mildly redundant sections that could be consolidated or split out.

Specificity

The description names the domain ("previous checkpoint via git") and one concrete action ("Roll back"), which matches the anchor 'Names domain and 1-2 concrete actions, but not comprehensive'. It stays below 4 because capabilities like listing checkpoints, previewing affected files, or creating a safety backup are not mentioned, and above 2 because 'roll back to a previous checkpoint via git' is a specific, non-generic action.

Completeness

It explicitly answers both questions: what ("Roll back to a previous checkpoint via git") and when ("use when a change went wrong and you need to revert"), with a concrete, naturally phrased trigger clause. It is not 4 because the 'when' clause is already explicit and specific rather than merely present-but-imprecise, and not below 5 since no anchor better fits.

Trigger Term Quality

Natural trigger terms are present: "roll back", "revert", and the phrase "when a change went wrong", which matches 'Good keyword coverage; a few natural terms missing'. It is not 5 because common synonyms a user would naturally say — "undo", "go back to", "restore checkpoint" — appear only in the separate frontmatter trigger block, not in the description itself, and there are no checkpoint-tag-style keywords.

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

The checkpoint framing carves a clear niche, matching 'Mostly distinct; minor overlap risk with closely related skills'. It is not 5 because generic trigger words like "revert" and "a change went wrong" could also fire for a plain git-revert or generic undo/edit-recovery skill.