Conciseness

Lean and command-driven throughout: no explanation of git concepts Claude already knows, and every line ("Stop if the working tree is dirty", "never use `git rebase -i`") earns its place.

Actionability

Seven concrete, executable commands (git rev-parse, git status --porcelain=v1, git show, git reset HEAD~1, git add, git commit, git log) cover the entire flow; the only placeholders (<files>, commit message template) are inherent user-specific parameters, not pseudocode.

Workflow Clarity

Eight clearly sequenced steps with explicit validation checkpoints (dirty-tree stop, scope guard, confirmation before rewriting history, post-verification), but no error-recovery or rollback guidance (e.g., restoring via ORIG_HEAD) for this history-rewriting operation, which the score-5 anchor expects.

Progressive Disclosure

A small single-purpose skill (~55 lines) with no bundle files and well-organized sections (Workflow, Constraints); per the rubric's simple-skill exception, well-organized sections alone merit a 5.

Specificity

Names the domain and one concrete action ("Split the most recent git commit into multiple logical commits") with a method constraint ("without interactive rebase"), but does not list several distinct actions as the score-4 anchor requires.

Completeness

Explicitly answers both "what" (split the most recent commit into multiple logical commits without interactive rebase) and "when" with concrete trigger phrases ("Use when invoked as `$git-split` or when the user asks to split HEAD into smaller commits").

Trigger Term Quality

Good coverage of natural phrasings users would say — "split", "git commit", "HEAD", "split HEAD into smaller commits" — though synonyms like "break up this commit" or "divide" are missing, keeping it just below comprehensive.

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

Clear niche (splitting HEAD into logical commits) with distinct triggers and minimal overlap risk against other git skills such as commit-message generation.