Conciseness

The body is ~25 lines with zero padding: no explanations of what Zoom or OAuth is, no restating of known concepts, and a 5-step workflow plus a plain reference list. It assumes Claude's competence throughout ('Route to the narrow skill once the surface is chosen'), matching anchor 5 ('lean and efficient; every token earns its place').

Actionability

Steps 1-2 are genuinely concrete (enumerated outcome categories and an explicit list of Zoom surfaces), but step 3 ('Confirm auth and scope model before implementation') and step 4 ('Route to the narrow skill') give no mechanism — the narrow skill names are never listed and the auth step isn't linked to the authentication/scopes references. This matches anchor 3 ('some concrete guidance but incomplete; missing key details') rather than anchor 4, whose guidance is executable end-to-end.

Workflow Clarity

The five steps are clearly numbered and correctly sequenced (classify → choose surface → confirm auth → route → fall back to the full guide), and step 3 acts as an explicit pre-implementation checkpoint. It falls short of anchor 5 because there is no validation or recovery guidance (e.g., what to do when the job spans multiple surfaces or the surface is ambiguous), matching anchor 4 ('clear sequence with most checkpoints present; minor validation gaps'). No destructive/batch cap applies since this is a routing skill.

Progressive Disclosure

The body is a pure overview and all six referenced files (references/full-guide.md, app-types.md, authentication.md, scopes.md, marketplace.md, query-routing-playbook.md) exist, are one level deep, and are clearly labeled with their purpose in a dedicated References section — matching anchor 5 ('clear overview with well-signaled one-level-deep references; content appropriately split').

Specificity

The description is only "Use when comparing products." — it names a domain (comparing products) but contains no capability/action statement whatsoever, which sits between anchor 1 (entirely vague, no concrete actions) and anchor 3 (domain plus 1-2 concrete actions). It matches anchor 2's shape ('names the domain but actions are minimal') but is even thinner than the 'Processes PDF files' example since there is no action verb describing what the skill does.

Completeness

Only a 'when' is present ("Use when comparing products") with no statement of what the skill does, which exactly matches anchor 2 ('only when is present without what', example: 'Use when working with documents'). The guideline that a missing 'what' cannot reach 3 also caps it below anchor 3.

Trigger Term Quality

The only candidate keywords are "comparing" and "products" — one or two generic terms with no natural variations ("compare Zoom apps", "Zoom vs", "which Zoom product", "platform overview"). It is missing the natural phrases a user would actually say, matching anchor 2 ('one or two generic keywords; missing the natural phrases users say') and clearly below anchor 3's 'some relevant keywords' with coverage.

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

"Use when comparing products" never mentions Zoom, so it would trigger for any product-comparison request across any skill ecosystem — matching anchor 2 ('very broad; high overlap risk with many similar skills'). It is not quite anchor 1 ('entirely generic') because the comparison intent does narrow the domain somewhat.