Conciseness

The body is dense and lean — no concept explanations Claude already knows, every sentence is instruction, e.g. “凭据仅通过执行环境注入，不写入方案、源码、生成包、Run 或报告”. It falls just short of anchor 5 because of minor repetition: the recovery stance “保留现场” is restated across 分析与方案, 确认 and 恢复边界, and the reference to 创作动作与恢复 is repeated twice.

Actionability

Concrete executable commands with full flags are given, e.g. `comet creator status <name> --project <项目> --json`, `comet creator start <name> --project <项目> --goal <用户目标> --install-target <相对目录> --host codex|claude-code --json`, and named gates (confirm-plan, confirm-eval, review-eval, confirm-install). Falls short of anchor 5 because the actual syntax for submitting/committing an action (how to submit a user decision on `confirm-plan` or submit a stage) is never shown, only described.

Workflow Clarity

The multi-phase sequence is explicit (开始或继续 → 分析与方案 → 确认、验证与交付 → 恢复边界) with strong validation checkpoints and feedback loops: “这些本地检查必须通过才可安装”, “失败时保留现场，修正方案或产物后沿原 Action 恢复”, eval retry/revise/skip decision points, and preview-before-install with re-confirmation on any change. This matches the top anchor including error-recovery loops.

Progressive Disclosure

The single external reference [创作动作与恢复](reference/sdk-creation.md) is well-signaled with explicit read conditions (“首次领取或提交动作前，读取…”), but the referenced file does not exist in the skill bundle (no references/, reference/, scripts/ or assets/ directories are present), so the navigation is dangling. Structure and signaling alone fit anchor 3–4; the unverifiable/missing reference path pulls it to 3.

Specificity

The description lists several concrete actions — “调查 Skills”、“创作 Native 扩展、Classic 编排或独立应用的完整入口 Skill 与业务 Rule”、“装配 Runtime”、“接入 Hook 并预览安装” — with only minor gaps (it never names the concrete lifecycle steps like eval or install approval). It matches anchor 4 (several specific actions, minor coverage gaps); not 5 because the actions are named at a high level without the comprehensive concrete detail of the top anchor.

Completeness

The “what” is clear (investigate skills, author entry Skill and business Rules, SDK assembles Runtime/Hooks and previews install), but “when” is only weakly implied through the negative clause “不用于一般 Skill 的整理或评审” — an exclusion, not an explicit trigger. Per the guideline, a missing explicit 'Use when...' clause caps completeness at 3.

Trigger Term Quality

Relevant domain keywords exist (“Skills”、“创作”、“扩展”、“编排”、“应用”、“安装”) but heavy internal jargon (“Classic 编排”、“Runtime”、“Hook”) dominates, and common natural variations or synonyms a user would say are missing. Fits anchor 3; not 2 because there is more than one or two generic keywords, not 4 because natural phrasing coverage is thin.

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

The niche (comet creator orchestration for Native/Classic/standalone compositions) plus the explicit exclusion “不用于一般 Skill 的整理或评审” makes it mostly distinct with only minor overlap risk against closely related skill-authoring skills. Not 5 because generic terms like “Skills”/“创作” could still collide with other authoring workflows absent that boundary sentence.