Conciseness

The body contains no explanations of concepts Claude already knows and is entirely operational, but it is noticeably repetitive: the honesty rule is stated five or more times (Core Principle, the checklist RULE, the 2e RULE, the Honesty Checklist, the Anti-Patterns) and the inline checklist templates (baseline, quick/task validation, 2e entry format) duplicate content already in references/checklist-templates.md. This fits anchor 3 ('could be tightened') better than 4, where over-explanation would be only minor.

Actionability

Guidance is fully executable for a process skill: exact file paths (.context/plans/<slug>/CHECKLIST.md), a gate-discovery block, a copy-paste git commit message template with evidence lines, a concrete audit command (grep -n "\[ \|IN_PROGRESS\|BLOCKED" CHECKLIST.md), and a YAML frontmatter snippet. Placeholders like <typecheck> are justified because gate commands are project-specific, matching the anchor-5 example of copy-paste-ready commands covering common cases.

Workflow Clarity

An eight-step workflow (pre-flight through plan-file update) with explicit validation at every level — baseline before touching code, quick gate after 1-3 file ops, task gate, phase gate, domain invariant, regression diff, final completeness audit — plus feedback loops ('If it fails: Stop. Fix... Re-run') and divergence handling. This is the anchor-5 exemplar: explicit validation steps, error-recovery loops, and a checklist for a complex process; anchor 4 would require missing checkpoints, and none are missing.

Progressive Disclosure

The bundle is verified: references/checklist-templates.md exists, is clearly signaled twice in the body with a description of its contents, and is one level deep with no nested references. It is not a 5 because the split is not clean — large template blocks remain inline in SKILL.md and duplicate what the reference file already provides; it is above a 3 because structure is good and the reference is well signaled rather than buried.

Specificity

Lists several concrete actions — 'pre-flighted, worked, validated with proof, and checked off', 'Every phase is validated as a whole', 'If proof is missing, the agent goes back' — but coverage has minor gaps (no mention of commits or checklist creation) and the 'Honesty is non-negotiable — broken trust' line is abstract padding, so it falls just short of the comprehensive anchor 5.

Completeness

Explicitly answers what ('Execute an implementation plan with rigorous checklist-driven verification' plus per-task and per-phase validation) and when ('Triggers: ...' list plus 'Do NOT use for plans that have not been reviewed'), which is the anchor-5 pattern of concrete trigger phrases for both. A 4 would require the 'when' to be less explicit, which it is not.

Trigger Term Quality

Nine natural quoted trigger phrases ('implement this plan', 'execute the plan', 'do the plan', 'carry out the phases', 'run the plan', 'work through the plan', 'begin implementation') give comprehensive coverage of how users would phrase the request, matching the synonym-coverage anchor. It is not a 4 because common variations are already present, not 'a few missing'.

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

Clear niche — executing already-reviewed implementation plans — with explicit boundary guidance ('use plan-review first'), giving minimal conflict risk. Only 'begin implementation' is mildly generic, which is not enough overlap to drop to anchor 4.