Conciseness

The ~15-line body contains zero concept explanations and no padding — every step is functional instruction ("Use the `listComments` tool", "match them by their comment id", "Verify your changes are consistent with the rest of the codebase"). It fully assumes Claude's competence, matching anchor 5 ("Lean and efficient; assumes Claude's competence; every token earns its place").

Actionability

The guidance names concrete tools (`listComments`, `resolveComments`, `deleteComments`) and gives a specific matching rule ("match them by their comment id") plus scoping options in step 2, making it mostly executable. It falls short of anchor 5 because step 5 offers resolve vs. delete with no criteria for choosing between them — a minor gap in concrete guidance.

Workflow Clarity

A clear 6-step numbered sequence with conditional handling in step 2 (attached-only vs. all vs. user-specified subset) and a final verification checkpoint in step 6. It falls short of anchor 5 because there is no error-recovery loop (what to do if step 6's verification fails) and the destructive resolve/delete actions in step 5 occur before verification, a minor validation-ordering gap.

Progressive Disclosure

This is a simple single-purpose skill under 50 lines with no bundle files (no references/, scripts/, or assets/ directories exist) and no content that warrants external files. The single well-organized section satisfies the rubric's simple-skill guideline ("For skills under 50 lines with no need for external references, progressive disclosure can score 5 with just well-organized sections").

Specificity

"Act on user feedback attached to the current session" names the domain but offers only the single generic action "act on" — it does not state the concrete sub-actions (retrieving comments, making changes, resolving/deleting comments). This matches the anchor "Names the domain but actions are minimal or generic"; it falls short of anchor 3 because no second concrete action is explicitly stated.

Completeness

The "what" is explicitly stated ("Act on user feedback attached to the current session") and the "when" is explicit and concrete ("Use when the user submits feedback on the current session's changes via the Submit Feedback button"). Both are clearly answered with a concrete trigger phrase, matching anchor 5; anchor 4 would require a less specific "when" clause, which is not the case here.

Trigger Term Quality

The description includes natural phrases a user would say ("user feedback", "submits feedback", "Submit Feedback button"), but misses common variations and synonyms such as "comments", "review changes", or "address feedback". This sits at anchor 3 ("Some relevant keywords but missing common variations or synonyms") rather than anchor 4, which expects broader keyword coverage.

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

References to "the current session's changes" and the "Submit Feedback button" carve out a clear niche tied to a specific UI action, minimizing overlap with general feedback- or code-review-related skills. This matches anchor 5 ("Clear niche with distinct triggers; minimal conflict risk").