Conciseness

Every line carries project-specific instruction or an exact value the model could not invent ("Elevation is 30 degrees", "spring with stiffness 64, damping 14.2 and a 0.04 s stagger", "Buttons are at least 44 px tall"); there is no explanation of concepts Claude already knows and no padding. The single illustrative example ("a request card moves on a carriage, a probe drops, and a press stamps the card") earns its place.

Actionability

Guidance is executable throughout: copy-paste commands ("Run `node templates/build.mjs`", "Run `node --test templates/model.test.mjs`"), named APIs (`simulate(config)`, `inkSolid`, `wobbleFilter`), a tier-approval table, and concrete config behaviors like "reads `?labels=0`". Per the rubric's code-vs-instruction note, an instruction-only skill with this level of concrete guidance meets the top anchor.

Workflow Clarity

The 12-step Method is sequenced in dependency order (model and tests before any geometry), with an explicit test-first checkpoint ("Test it before any geometry"), a dedicated headless verification step with screenshots and a zero-console-error scenario sweep, and a 15-item "Check before you finish" checklist. This matches the anchor-5 pattern of clear sequence, explicit validation, and checklists.

Progressive Disclosure

The body is a genuine overview with well-signaled, one-level-deep references — all six `references/*.md` files exist and each is summarized with its scope in the Files section. It falls short of anchor 5 because 9 of the 15 files listed in the Files section (`templates/model.mjs`, `templates/build.mjs`, `kit/iso-kit.mjs`, `kit/ink.mjs`, etc.) are absent from the bundle as shipped, leaving key instructions like "Run `node templates/build.mjs`" pointing at files the reader cannot open; still clearly above anchor 3 since references are clearly signaled and nothing that belongs in a reference is inlined.

Specificity

Names the concrete domain and several specific capabilities ("A pure, tested state model drives the motion, the readouts and the copy", "controls and a verification loop") beyond the 1-2 actions of anchor 3, but it describes one artifact's properties rather than the comprehensive list of discrete actions exemplified by anchor 5.

Completeness

Explicitly answers "what" (builds an interactive isometric machine page where stations stand for process steps, driven by a tested state model) and "when" via concrete trigger phrases, matching the anchor-5 pattern of a clear what plus explicit trigger guidance. The "Trigger phrases:" clause is equivalent explicit trigger guidance, so the missing-'Use when' cap does not apply.

Trigger Term Quality

Six natural, varied trigger phrases including synonyms ("isometric explainer", "machine explainer", "explain this as a machine", "interactive isometric figure", "explorable explainer", "show how it works inside") give comprehensive coverage of how a user would naturally request this skill. Not anchor 4, because no dominant common phrasing for this niche is missing.

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

A clear niche (isometric machine explainers for processes) with distinctive triggers like "isometric explainer" and "explain this as a machine"; minimal risk of triggering for a generic diagram or document skill. Above anchor 4 because the triggers are niche-specific rather than merely mostly distinct.