Conciseness

The body is largely lean — install commands, compact dual React/HTML snippets, and a dense CSP directive block with a justified 'unsafe-inline' rationale. Minor over-explanation: the 'Fields outside the form' section spends several sentences on standard HTML form-attribute semantics Claude already knows ('the browser submits the field with that form, wherever it is on the page'). Fits anchor 4 ('efficient; minor instances of over-explanation') rather than anchor 5, and is well above anchor 3's 'some unnecessary explanation'.

Actionability

Everything is copy-paste ready: 'npm add @oslokommune/punkt-react', full import plus JSX usage, CDN <link>/<script> tags, executable CSP header block, and concrete size/prop tables with code in both frameworks. Matches anchor 5's 'fully executable; copy-paste ready code or commands; specific examples cover the common cases'.

Workflow Clarity

Getting started is a clear install → import → use → configure-CSP sequence, with CSP setup explicitly flagged as a required checkpoint ('Missing CSP configuration is a common cause of broken fonts, missing icons, and invisible components') and an important warning callout. This is a usage/reference skill, not a multi-step process, and no validation loop is required — anchor 4's 'clear sequence with most checkpoints' fits better than anchor 5's feedback-loop pattern.

Progressive Disclosure

The body is a clear overview that defers per-component detail to 33 one-level-deep links (accordion.md … timepicker.md) plus strings.md, header.md, footer.md, header-menu.md and consent.md, each clearly signaled; cross-cutting guidance (CSP, input sizes, form association) is appropriately kept inline. Matches anchor 5's 'clear overview with well-signaled one-level-deep references; content appropriately split'.

Specificity

Names the domain and several concrete coverage areas ('component APIs, props, events, slots, and usage patterns'), matching anchor 4's 'several specific actions; minor gaps'. Not anchor 5 because it lists coverage topics rather than multiple concrete actions with comprehensive scope.

Completeness

Clear 'what' (component APIs, props, events, slots, usage patterns) and an explicit 'when' clause ('Use when building UIs with Punkt components'). Not anchor 5 because the trigger is a single narrow phrase — a user mentioning a specific component (e.g. 'use PktButton') would not match it — whereas anchor 5 expects concrete plural trigger phrases; clearly above anchor 3's 'when missing or only weakly implied'.

Trigger Term Quality

Good natural keyword coverage ('Punkt design system components', 'React', 'Elements/Web Components', 'props', 'events', 'slots', 'building UIs') but misses package names like '@oslokommune/punkt-react' and component-level phrasings users would actually say. Fits anchor 4's 'good keyword coverage; a few natural terms missing' rather than anchor 5's synonym/extension-complete coverage.

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

'Punkt design system' is a clearly delineated niche with distinct, brand-specific triggers; minimal conflict risk with any other skill. Matches anchor 5 exactly.