Conciseness

Mostly efficient, but includes unnecessary material: the 'Mindset' section is explanatory rather than instructional ('The interview is not a checklist to complete — it is a chain of decisions'), the opening paragraph restates the description, the one-question rule is stated three times (Protocol step 2, NEVER rule #1, and Verification), and the 'Quick diagnostic' bash block adds little. Matches the level-3 anchor of mostly efficient with some unnecessary explanation; not level 4 given the number of trims available.

Actionability

For an instruction-only skill the guidance is highly actionable: a numbered 7-step protocol, concrete tool direction ('Use the AskUserQuestion tool for a single question at a time'), literal example opening text, BAD/GOOD contrast pairs, and a troubleshooting table. Minor gap: the 'echo "$USER_PROMPT" | head -c 200' block is presented as a runnable diagnostic but is not executable as written, and its comment claiming it 'Returns interview or answer-directly' is inaccurate. Matches level 4, not level 5, due to that pseudo-executable snippet.

Workflow Clarity

The protocol is a clearly sequenced 7-step workflow with explicit validation checkpoints ('Do not proceed past this point on an unconfirmed recap', 'could I write the recap right now without guessing?') plus feedback loops for error recovery (contradiction handling, scope drift, user override) and a closing Verification checklist. This matches the level-5 anchor of clear sequence with explicit validation and error-recovery loops; not level 4 since checkpoints are explicit rather than minor-gapped.

Progressive Disclosure

The body appropriately splits detail into two existing, one-level-deep references, each clearly signaled with its content summarized ('question-design.md — the 3-4 rule, what makes an option concrete, and when to stop asking'; 'worked-example.md — a fully annotated interview from opening question through recap and confirmation'), with no nested references. Matches the level-5 anchor of a clear overview with well-signaled one-level-deep references; not level 4 since there are no buried or misdirected references.

Specificity

Multiple concrete actions comprehensively cover the skill's behavior: 'Conduct a structured, one-question-at-a-time interview', 'each question offers 3-4 concrete, mutually exclusive options plus a free-text path', 'later questions adapt to prior answers', 'Ends with a recap the user confirms before finalizing', 'produces a synthesized answer or...a written brief'. No coverage gaps visible, matching the level-5 anchor rather than level 4's 'minor gaps'.

Completeness

The 'what' is clear and detailed, but there is no positive 'Use when...' clause; the 'when' is only weakly implied by purpose ('to explore a specific topic or decision') and by negative scoping ('NOT for open-ended ambiguity-surfacing...or single-fact lookups'). Per the guideline that a missing 'Use when...' clause or equivalent explicit positive trigger guidance caps completeness at 3.

Trigger Term Quality

Good natural keywords are present ('interview', 'one-question-at-a-time', 'topic or decision', 'recap', 'brief'), but common user phrasings like 'requirements gathering', 'walk me through a decision', 'help me figure out', or 'ask me questions' are missing — matching the level-4 anchor of good coverage with a few natural terms missing rather than level 5's comprehensive synonym coverage.

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

Clear niche with explicit disambiguation from the nearest neighbor skill: 'NOT for open-ended ambiguity-surfacing (use socratic-method) or single-fact lookups'. This matches the level-5 anchor of a clear niche with distinct triggers and minimal conflict risk.