Conciseness

The body is lean and assumes Claude's competence throughout — it spends zero tokens on known concepts and every line carries non-obvious operational detail (keychain/sandbox retry rules, worktree path derivation, commit reference conventions like "Resolves DEVX-696"), matching the "every token earns its place" anchor.

Actionability

Most steps are copy-paste executable (`linear issue view <TICKET-ID> --no-pager`, the full worktree-creation script, `linear issue comment add ... --body-file ...`, `git push -u origin <branch-name>`), but Phase 6's fallback — "otherwise create with ticket-specific labels such as `D-skip-changelog`, `K-*`..." — provides no concrete PR-creation command, and Phase 8's "Reply to the plan thread" omits the reply command, fitting anchor 4's "minor gaps" rather than anchor 5's fully copy-paste-ready coverage.

Workflow Clarity

The eight phases are clearly sequenced with explicit checkpoints ("Present the plans and stop for user selection before implementation", "After plan approval") and genuine feedback loops (retry outside the sandbox on `No keyring entry`; "If a failure is ambiguous or high-risk, pause and report"; fix straightforward failures and commit separately), meeting the top anchor; operations are additive and reversible (draft PR, new branch), so the destructive-operation cap does not apply.

Progressive Disclosure

The phase headers make navigation easy and nothing that belongs in a separate file is inlined, but the ~97-line body exceeds the under-50-line threshold that would let organization alone justify a 5, and there is no reference structure at all — anchor 4's "good structure; most content appropriately placed; minor organization gaps" is the best fit.

Specificity

The description enumerates seven concrete actions — "gathering context, planning, creating a branch/worktree, implementing, testing, opening a draft PR, and updating Linear" — giving comprehensive coverage of the workflow with no gaps, matching the top anchor rather than anchor 4.

Completeness

Both parts are explicit: the "what" is the full seven-action workflow and the "when" is stated verbatim as "Use when invoked as `$linear-plan` or when the user asks to start a Linear ticket", with concrete trigger phrases, meeting the top anchor rather than anchor 4's merely adequate "when".

Trigger Term Quality

It includes natural phrases users would say ("start a Linear ticket", "draft PR", "worktree", "branch") plus the explicit `$linear-plan` trigger, but misses common synonyms such as "Linear issue", "pick up DEVX-…", or "begin this ticket", so it fits anchor 4 rather than the comprehensive-synonym coverage of anchor 5.

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

The description carves out a clear niche — end-to-end Linear ticket workflow — with a distinct invocation trigger, so overlap with generic branch/PR skills is minimal; anchor 5 fits better than anchor 4's "minor overlap risk with closely related skills".