Conciseness

The body is lean with every token carrying repo-specific knowledge (exact file paths, "parseNormalizedEvent", the "JSON.stringify(Promise) silently becomes {}" gotcha) and zero padding or explanation of concepts Claude already knows, matching anchor 5; it is above anchor 4 because there are no over-explanation instances to trim.

Actionability

Concrete file paths are given for every contract boundary (e.g. "electron/main/ipc/schemas.ts", "src/lib/session/provider-event-replay.ts"), plus a specific doc entry point and an exact async gotcha — fully actionable specific guidance for an instruction-only skill, which the scoring notes say is not penalized for lacking code, matching anchor 5.

Workflow Clarity

The five steps (trigger → producer → boundary → consumer → tests) are clearly sequenced with step 5 ("Check tests that mention the same type, event, or function") as a verification checkpoint, but there is no explicit feedback or error-recovery loop, so it fits anchor 4 (clear sequence, most checkpoints, minor validation gaps) rather than anchor 5; it is not a destructive or batch operation so no cap applies.

Progressive Disclosure

No bundle files exist and the ~49-line body is well organized into Workflow, boundary table, Stave-Specific Guidance, Output, and Avoid sections with no need for external references — the judging guideline explicitly allows a 5 for skills under 50 lines with well-organized sections and no need of external references.

Specificity

"Trace a behavior, event, or request path through the Stave codebase" and "the exact producer -> bridge -> consumer chain" name concrete actions with structural detail, but the coverage rests on a single verb with object variants rather than several distinct actions, matching anchor 4 (several specific actions, minor gaps) better than the comprehensive anchor 5.

Completeness

Explicitly answers what ("Trace a behavior, event, or request path through the Stave codebase") and when ("Use when the request asks...") with concrete trigger phrases, exactly matching the anchor-5 pattern; it is above anchor 4 because the 'when' clause is fully explicit with quoted triggers.

Trigger Term Quality

Includes natural phrases users would actually say — "where does this happen", "execution path", "call flow" — plus Korean synonyms "흐름 추적" and "어디서 처리돼", giving comprehensive coverage including synonyms, which matches anchor 5; common variations are not missing.

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

Scoping to "the Stave codebase" with niche triggers ("producer -> bridge -> consumer chain") makes it mostly distinct, but the fairly generic trigger "where does this happen" creates minor overlap risk with general code-search skills, fitting anchor 4 rather than anchor 5's minimal conflict risk.