Conciseness

The body is dense, checklist-style operational prose with no explanation of concepts Claude already knows and no padding; every line directs behavior (e.g., "Require one unexpired dotnet-inspect-release-candidate artifact. Do not substitute a version, branch, newer run..."). It matches anchor 5's 'every token earns its place'.

Actionability

The `gh workflow run release.yml` block is copy-paste ready and the record/present/verify lists name exact fields and surfaces, but how to perform several identity checks is delegated to the external docs/release-workflow.md rather than given concretely. That places it at anchor 4 ('mostly executable guidance... with minor gaps') rather than 5, and well above anchor 3's pseudocode level.

Workflow Clarity

The sequence (select candidate → validate readiness → present decision → publish → verify/recover) is explicit, with validation checklists ("Confirm that: 1-7"), stop conditions, and feedback loops for error recovery ("If publication partially fails, rerun release.yml with the same run ID... If revalidation reports changed or expired identity, stop"). This matches anchor 5 exactly; anchor 4 would require missing checkpoints, which are not missing.

Progressive Disclosure

Sections are well organized and the one external reference (docs/release-workflow.md, plus the #ship-only-override anchor) is clearly signaled and one level deep, delegating the release contract appropriately. However, the body inlines substantial checklist detail and the referenced doc could not be verified in this standalone review context, so structure is good but not the anchor-5 ideal.

Specificity

"independently validate one immutable candidate, present concerns, and publish" lists several concrete, domain-specific actions, but coverage has minor gaps (e.g., verification and recovery steps of the release process are not mentioned). This matches anchor 4 rather than 5, which requires comprehensive coverage, and exceeds anchor 3's 1-2 concrete actions.

Completeness

The description explicitly answers both questions: "Use when shipping a new dotnet-inspect version" gives a concrete when-clause, and the remainder states exactly what the skill does (validate one candidate, present concerns, publish only after the operator decides) in third person. It matches the anchor-5 example pattern; anchor 4 would require a weaker or less explicit 'when', which is not the case.

Trigger Term Quality

"shipping", "publish", and "new dotnet-inspect version" are natural phrases a maintainer would say, giving good keyword coverage; the obvious synonym "release" is absent, keeping it below anchor 5's comprehensive synonym coverage.

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

The description is tightly scoped to dotnet-inspect version releases with a distinctive operator-decision gate, creating a clear niche with minimal conflict risk against other skills.