Conciseness

The body is dense with project-specific facts Claude cannot know (the LF runtime, fence syntax, keySplines values, the 279 px measurement at 375 px width, ES5 constraints) and explains no general concepts. Every line is prescriptive; matches anchor 5 (lean, assumes competence, every token earns its place) rather than anchor 4, which would require trimmable over-explanation that is absent here.

Actionability

Guidance is largely executable — exact fence syntax with a copy-paste example, the figure-function signature, `viewBox="0 0 520 H"`, `var(--blueprint,#3553ff)` patterns, and `LF.register` call. It falls short of anchor 5 because Method step 2 directs tier-2/3 authors to 'start from `templates/mechanism.html`' and 'copy `templates/dither.js`', and neither file exists in the bundle — those paths are dead ends, a concrete gap in executable guidance.

Workflow Clarity

A 13-step Method in strict order, ending in step 13's explicit instruction to run the 'Check before you finish' section, which is a 15-item validation checklist covering reduced motion, dark theme, 375 px width, slider min/max NaN, and per-tier reference checklists, plus a browser-console validator in `references/smil-rules.md`. This matches anchor 5 (clear sequence, explicit validation, checklists); the work is not destructive or batch, so no cap applies.

Progressive Disclosure

The body is a clean overview with one-level-deep references, all five `references/*.md` files exist, and the Files section summarizes each so navigation is easy — structurally an anchor 5. Scoring against the actual bundle per the rubric guideline, however, 2 of the 7 referenced paths (`templates/mechanism.html`, `templates/dither.js`) are missing from the directory, a real organization gap that fits anchor 4 (good structure, minor gaps) better than 5.

Specificity

Names multiple concrete actions across three tiers — 'SMIL animations and slider widgets inside lessons', 'interactive mechanism figures that show the named parts of a real system with a computed verdict', 'ordered dither bands' — with comprehensive coverage and no vague padding. Matches the anchor 5 example (multiple specific concrete actions); it exceeds anchor 4 because no tier or capability is left uncovered.

Completeness

Explicitly answers both questions: the 'what' is the three concrete artifact types, and the 'when' is given as an explicit trigger list ('Triggers: "animated figure", ...'). This mirrors the anchor 5 example's what-plus-when-with-concrete-trigger-phrases structure; anchor 4 would require the when to be less explicit, which it is not.

Trigger Term Quality

Eight natural trigger phrases users would actually say, including request forms ('add a slider widget', 'make this diagram move', 'show how this system works') and synonyms spanning all three tiers ('animated figure', 'interactive figure', 'mechanism figure', 'dither masthead', 'figure fence'). Matches anchor 5's comprehensive natural-term coverage; only notional gaps like 'animate this diagram' exist, which are near-synonyms of phrases already present.

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

The niche (figures that move or respond, in a course-site context) is clearly carved out with distinct triggers, but 'show how this system works' is a broad phrase that could also apply to the sibling isometric-explainer skill the body says covers explainer pages. Fits anchor 4 (mostly distinct, minor overlap risk with closely related skills) better than anchor 5's minimal-conflict example.