Conciseness

The body teaches no known concepts and is all operational directives, but it is padded with very long compound sentences (the full.build.configure step packs seven directives into one paragraph) and repeats state-reuse guidance roughly three times ("Do not repeat next, select, or check while state is valid", "read again only on a cold resume", "Reuse them when already available"). This matches the anchor of mostly efficient but could be tightened, not the 4-level of only minor trims.

Actionability

Most guidance is executable with exact commands and flags ("comet state propose-build <change-name> --file <configuration-json> --confirmed", "comet guard <change-name> build --apply -- <program> [args...]"). It falls short of 5 because some placeholders (<builder-execution-ref>, <plan-ref>) and vague directives ("Resolve drift before submission", "repair the cause") depend on external references or leave the exact procedure unspecified.

Workflow Clarity

The four numbered steps give a clear configure → plan → execute → check sequence with explicit validation ("--apply revalidates current tasks, configuration, workspace, and evidence", "Only valid successful evidence advances to Verify") and explicit feedback loops (rejection → "Propose revised choices after rejection"; failure → "repair the cause from the returned current Build Action"; interrupted receipt → "investigate the Action and check record before re-executing anything"). This matches the top anchor of clear sequencing with validation checkpoints and error-recovery loops.

Progressive Disclosure

The body is a lean overview that keeps protocol detail behind clearly signaled, one-level-deep section-anchored links ("../comet-classic/reference/sdk-methods.md#build", "../comet/reference/change-walkthrough.md"). It is not a 5 because the bundle contains no reference files at all, so "reference/compat.md" is a broken in-bundle path and the cross-bundle "../comet/..." targets cannot be verified from this skill.

Specificity

"Plan, implement, and accept Classic tasks" names the domain and three verbs, but the actions are generic with no detail on what any of them concretely involve, matching the anchor for domain plus 1-2 concrete actions that are not comprehensive. It is not a 4 because the verbs lack the specificity of examples like "extracts text, fills forms, converts pages to images".

Completeness

Both parts are present: the what ("Plan, implement, and accept Classic tasks") and an explicit when ("Use when the user invokes /comet-build or Classic Runtime enters Build or returns to Build for repairs") with concrete triggers. It falls short of 5 because the what-side is thin — "accept Classic tasks" leaves the actual deliverables vague.

Trigger Term Quality

"Use when the user invokes /comet-build or Classic Runtime enters Build or returns to Build for repairs" provides real trigger terms, but they are largely system-state jargon ("Classic Runtime enters Build") and miss natural user phrasings like "build the change" or "classic build". It fits the anchor of some relevant keywords missing common variations, not the 4-level of good natural-term coverage.

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

"comet-build", the "Build" phase, and "Classic Runtime" carve a clear niche with distinct triggers, giving minimal conflict risk outside the comet suite. It is not a 5 because "Plan, implement, and accept Classic tasks" plausibly overlaps with sibling comet phase skills (planning or verification skills in the same family).