Conciseness

The ~90-line body is lean and every section earns its place: a two-sentence intro (justified for a niche library Claude may not know), MCP config, install commands, a copy-paste Quick Start, four Key Concepts bullets, and a routing table. No padding or explanations of concepts Claude already knows; anchor 4 ('minor instances of over-explanation') would require trimmable content beyond the small duplicate of the version requirement already in frontmatter.

Actionability

The Quick Start is fully executable (useRegle setup, v-model binding, error list rendering, $validate on submit) and install commands are concrete — but the MCP Server section's four-backtick fence at line 20 is not closed until line 38, so the '## Installation' heading and the `pnpm add` commands are swallowed into the JSON code block and don't render as a heading/code block. Fits anchor 4 ('mostly executable guidance ... with minor gaps') rather than 5, since the install step is structurally broken in rendered markdown despite being written correctly.

Workflow Clarity

The sequence install → useRegle setup → bind v-model → display errors → $validate on submit is present and the single core task is unambiguous, which would merit 5 under the simple-skill exception. However, the unterminated MCP fence hides the Installation heading, muddying the first step of the sequence, which fits anchor 4 ('clear sequence with most checkpoints present; minor gaps') better.

Progressive Disclosure

The body is a lean overview with a table routing each topic (useRegle, validation properties, displaying errors, modifiers) to a description-labeled, one-level-deep reference; all four linked files exist in references/. A Related skills section routes to the four sibling skills. This matches or exceeds the anchor-5 example pattern of well-signaled one-level-deep references.

Specificity

The description lists multiple concrete capabilities: "setup with `useRegle`, the reactive `r$` object, validation properties, displaying errors, and modifiers" plus concrete actions like "binding `v-model` to `r$.$value`" and "reading `$error`/`$errors`/`$invalid`/`$validate`/`$reset`" — comprehensive coverage with no vague filler. Anchor 4 ('several specific actions; minor gaps') is too low since the API surface is enumerated at the property level.

Completeness

Both what ("Core Regle form validation in Vue 3 — setup ... validation properties, displaying errors, and modifiers") and when ("Use when adding or editing Regle forms, binding `v-model` to `r$.$value`, or reading `$error`/...") are explicitly stated with concrete trigger phrases, plus routing guidance to sibling skills. Matches the anchor-5 example structure exactly.

Trigger Term Quality

Natural user phrasings are comprehensively covered: "Regle form validation", "Vue 3", "adding or editing Regle forms", "displaying errors", and specific API names ($validate, $reset, v-model) a user of this library would naturally mention. Nothing anchor-4 ('a few natural terms missing') points to is actually missing.

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

"Regle" carves a clear niche and the description explicitly delegates ("For validation rules see regle-rules; for advanced patterns see regle-advanced"), but the skill sits in a family of five closely related regle skills and the broad trigger "adding or editing Regle forms" could pull in queries that belong to regle-rules or regle-schemas (not mentioned). Fits anchor 4 ('mostly distinct; minor overlap risk with closely related skills') better than 5, since overlap with siblings is possible despite the routing.