Conciseness

The ~40-line body is lean with no padding and no explanation of concepts Claude already knows; sections like "Default assumption: if a claim depends on variability... the visualization should show that explicitly" each earn their place. It matches the 'lean and efficient; every token earns its place' anchor.

Actionability

Steps like "Choose encodings that show spread, uncertainty, missingness, or sample size honestly" and "Name the statistical question, not just the chart type" are concrete behaviors but name no specific encodings, chart choices, or worked examples — the executable specifics are deferred to references. This sits between 'minimal concrete guidance' (2) and 'mostly executable guidance' (4).

Workflow Clarity

The 4-step "Working Pattern" is a coherent, ordered design sequence and the task is non-destructive, so validation checkpoints are largely not applicable. It matches 'clear sequence with most checkpoints present; minor gaps' — an inline decision checkpoint (e.g., 'verify the chosen encoding still shows the variation that matters before finalizing') would push it to 5.

Progressive Disclosure

The body is a concise overview with a clearly-labeled References section and one-level-deep skill references (`./references/*.md`, all four of which exist). However, both shared-theory paths (`../../references/foundations/task-abstraction-and-chart-selection.md`, `../../references/foundations/perception-color-and-encoding.md`) do not exist on disk, so navigation to a third of the referenced material is broken — more than the 'minor organization gaps' of the 4 anchor.

Specificity

"Design statistically honest and uncertainty-aware visualizations" names the domain clearly but offers only one concrete action (designing visualizations) qualified by adjectives, matching the 'names domain and 1-2 concrete actions' anchor. It does not list several specific actions (e.g., choosing interval encodings, annotating missingness) that would warrant a 4.

Completeness

It explicitly answers what ("Design statistically honest and uncertainty-aware visualizations") and when ("Use when the user needs help showing distributions, intervals, confidence, missingness, sampling effects, or analytical rigor") with concrete trigger phrases, matching the top anchor. Third-person voice is used correctly.

Trigger Term Quality

Natural trigger terms like "distributions, intervals, confidence, missingness, sampling effects" plus "charts and dashboards" cover the phrases users would plausibly say (e.g., 'how do I show confidence intervals'). A few common synonyms are missing (e.g., 'error bars', 'spread', 'variance'), so it falls just short of the comprehensive 5 anchor.

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

The statistical-honesty niche (missingness, sampling effects, confidence) is fairly distinct from general chart-styling skills, but the trailing trigger "charts and dashboards" is broad enough to overlap with general dataviz skills. This is 'mostly distinct; minor overlap risk with closely related skills' rather than the minimal-conflict 5.