The body is a lean overview/index: '使用时机', '适用场景', and the architecture table each earn their place, and the '重要术语' entries (跨端模板 pc.vue/mobile-first.vue, 无渲染逻辑层 packages/renderless) convey tinyvue-specific domain knowledge Claude does not already have. It matches 'Lean and efficient; assumes Claude's competence; every token earns its place' and is not score 2 because there is no general-knowledge padding.

The architecture table gives concrete pointers ('packages/vue', 'packages/renderless', './vue.skill.md'), but the actual executable guidance is deferred to 11 referenced files that do not exist in the bundle, leaving the skill itself without actionable detail. This matches 'Some concrete guidance but incomplete... missing key details' and is not 3 because nothing is copy-paste or directly executable.

The architecture table implies a structural workflow (template→packages/vue, logic→packages/renderless, styles→packages/theme) but no numbered development sequence or validation/verification checkpoint is given. This matches 'Steps listed but... checkpoints missing or implicit' and is not 1 because module organization is present, not 3 because there is no explicit sequenced workflow with validation.

The body follows the intended progressive-disclosure pattern — a concise overview with a '参考规范' column clearly signaling one-level-deep references to 11 ./xxx.skill.md files — but all 11 referenced files are missing from the bundle, so navigation leads nowhere. Per the guideline to score against the actual bundle structure, the broken references prevent a 3; it is not 1 because the signaling and organization are clear and references are only one level deep.

The phrase 'tinyvue组件库开发规范' names the domain (tinyvue component library) but provides no concrete actions — '开发规范' (development specification) is an abstract noun, not a verb like 'extract', 'fill', or 'merge'. This matches the score-1 anchor 'Vague or no actions; abstract language' and falls below score 2, which requires naming 'some actions'.

It states what the skill is (a development specification for the tinyvue component library) but gives no 'when to use' trigger clause, so per the guideline a missing 'Use when...' caps completeness at 2 ('Has what, but when is missing or only implied'). It is not 1 because the 'what' is at least stated, and not 3 because no explicit trigger guidance exists.

'tinyvue组件库' and '开发规范' are natural terms a developer in this repo would say, but common variations (e.g. '新增组件', '修改组件', 'Renderless', '主题开发') are absent, matching 'Some relevant keywords but missing common variations'. It is not score 3 because coverage of natural trigger phrasings is thin.

Naming the specific product 'tinyvue' carves out a clear niche unlikely to conflict with unrelated skills, matching 'Clear niche with distinct triggers; unlikely to conflict'. It is not 2 because the product-scoped domain is more specific than the generic 'Works with document files' anchor.