Conciseness

The body is dense procedural guidance with commands, routing rules, and failure paths, and it does not explain concepts Claude already knows. However, there is genuine repetition — the Guardrails section restates rules already stated in the steps (announce the change, run sync inline), and the context/operationGuidance handling contract in step 1 is expressed in several overlapping ways — which keeps it below the lean top anchor.

Actionability

Fully executable commands are given throughout — `openspec instructions archive --change "<name>" --json`, `openspec status --change "<name>" --json`, `mkdir -p "<planningHome.changesDir>/archive"`, `mv "<changeRoot>" ...` — along with the exact JSON fields to parse and explicit routing for each prompt answer. The guidance is copy-paste ready and covers the common cases.

Workflow Clarity

Six clearly sequenced steps with explicit validation checkpoints: artifact/task completion checks, a mandatory post-sync re-comparison of every capability, stop-on-failure rules ("If the sync failed, or any capability does not match, report what differs and stop — do not archive"), and a pre-move existence check for the destructive `mv`. Feedback loops and a guardrail checklist are both present, matching the top anchor.

Progressive Disclosure

No bundle files exist, so all content lives in a single SKILL.md with well-organized step, guardrail, and output-template sections — good structure overall. Minor gaps: ~170 lines of dense procedural text (e.g., the shared store-selection paragraph and instruction-contract rules) is inlined where a reference file could carry it, and the `openspec-sync-specs` workflow is invoked without a path or link to its location.

Specificity

"Archive a completed change in the experimental workflow" names the domain plus the actions "finalize" and "archive", but does not enumerate the concrete sub-actions the skill performs (completion checks, spec syncing, moving to the archive directory). It matches the anchor for naming a domain with 1-2 concrete actions rather than listing several specific actions.

Completeness

It explicitly answers both what ("Archive a completed change in the experimental workflow") and when ("Use when the user wants to finalize and archive a change after implementation is complete") with a concrete trigger phrase, matching the top anchor; the "when" clause is fully explicit rather than weakly implied.

Trigger Term Quality

Natural trigger terms are present — "archive", "finalized", "completed", "after implementation is complete" — which users would plausibly say. A few common variations (e.g., "move this change to the archive", "wrap up the change") are missing, so it fits good-but-not-comprehensive keyword coverage.

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

The skill occupies a clear niche (archiving a completed change), but "experimental workflow" is opaque without naming the tool/domain, and closely related sibling skills (status, sync, list) create minor overlap risk. It is mostly distinct rather than having minimal conflict risk.