Conciseness

The ~50-line body is lean and sectioned (适用范围/工作流程/安全边界/输出契约/验证) with zero padding or explanation of concepts Claude already knows; every line adds operational or safety information, matching the 'every token earns its place' anchor.

Actionability

Concrete, near copy-paste commands are given for validation ('python3 scripts/validate_repo.py --strict') and the read-only check ('python3 scripts/sync_skills.py --destination "<destination>" --profile core --check'), plus a concrete destination example ('C:\Users\<user>\.codex\skills'), but the apply step is described rather than given verbatim and the referenced scripts live in the source repo rather than the bundle — minor gaps that keep it at 4 rather than 5.

Workflow Clarity

The 5-step sequence is explicit with validation checkpoints at every risky point: strict source validation before anything, a read-only --check baseline, user-confirmed apply, and a mandatory post-apply --check on the same destination; failure handling ('源端校验失败时停止恢复并保留原始错误') and the verification evidence block complete the feedback loop, satisfying the destructive/batch validation requirement rather than falling under its cap.

Progressive Disclosure

The body is short, well-organized, and delegates the cross-device checklist to a single clearly signaled one-level-deep reference ([restore-profile.md](references/restore-profile.md)) that actually exists in the bundle with no further nesting — the ideal overview-plus-one-reference structure.

Specificity

The description lists multiple concrete actions — '提供只读审计、显式应用、SHA-256 校验，并且不删除目标端额外文件' — covering restore, read-only audit, explicit apply, hash verification, and destination preservation, which matches the comprehensive-coverage anchor rather than the 4 anchor that implies minor gaps.

Completeness

It explicitly answers both what ('恢复已登记的 Codex Skill…提供只读审计、显式应用、SHA-256 校验…') and when ('用于复现 Codex 工作环境、比较已安装 Skill 与备份仓库，或准备安全的跨设备恢复') with three concrete trigger scenarios, matching the 5 anchor; the 4 anchor applies only when the 'when' is less explicit, which is not the case here.

Trigger Term Quality

Natural trigger phrases are present ('恢复已登记的 Codex Skill', '复现 Codex 工作环境', '跨设备恢复', '比较已安装 Skill 与备份仓库'), but common synonyms users might say (安装、同步、迁移) and any file/extension cues are missing, so it fits the 'good coverage, a few natural terms missing' anchor rather than the 5 anchor.

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

The restore/apply-to-destination niche is distinct, but the read-only audit and compare-installed-vs-backup framing overlaps with repository-maintenance and quality-gate skills without a description-level boundary statement, so it fits 'mostly distinct; minor overlap risk with closely related skills' rather than the 5 anchor's 'clear niche with minimal conflict risk'.