Conciseness

The body is well-structured but repeats the same rules multiple times — 'never rename without confirmation' and 'never guess a year' each reappear in the opening, steps, Operating principles, and Performance Notes, which is tightening that could be cut without loss.

Actionability

Gives concrete, copy-paste-ready guidance: specific MCP calls with parameters (e.g. 'listFolderContents' with 'depth: 5, foldersOnly: false', 'updateContent(projectId, metadataId, name=...)'), worked proposal-table examples, and exact extension rules.

Workflow Clarity

Eight clearly sequenced steps with explicit validation checkpoints — the mandatory pre-flight extension check before the table and per-call + post-apply extension verification in Step 7 — with error-recovery notes for a destructive batch operation.

Progressive Disclosure

The body instructs 'Read references/naming-conventions.md' but no references/ directory or file exists, so the reference is broken; the body is also a single ~230-line inline document where the full conventions table and feature details could be split out.

Specificity

Lists multiple concrete actions ('standardise document names, clean up scanned file names, normalise naming across similar document types') rather than vague language, matching the score-3 anchor; not score 2 which only names some actions.

Completeness

Explicitly answers both what (standardise/clean/normalise document names) and when ('Use this skill whenever a deal team wants to...') with explicit triggers, matching the score-3 anchor.

Trigger Term Quality

Includes natural phrases a user would actually say ('rename the files', 'clean up the file names', 'the file names are a mess', 'tidy up the data room') with broad coverage, matching score 3 rather than score 2's partial coverage.

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

Scoped to Datasite deal rooms with an explicit negative scope ('Do not use for document quality or PII checks — use document-quality-check for that'), giving a clear niche unlikely to conflict.