Conciseness

The body is dense with signal — comparison tables, tight bullet lists, and runnable commands — with no explanation of concepts Claude already knows. Minor trimming is possible: a few bullets restate the table ("Any question where speed > depth", "Questions where coverage > speed", "Long wait times are acceptable"), and each model section could carry one example instead of two or three. This fits the 'efficient; minor instances that could be trimmed' anchor, not 3 (which would need noticeably unnecessary explanation) or 5 (nothing trimmable).

Actionability

Every section is built on fully executable, copy-paste-ready commands with real flags (`--model sonar-pro --recency month`, `--model sonar-reasoning --reasoning high`, `--mode academic`) and examples covering the common cases for all four models, the reasoning-effort levels, and an agent loop piping through jq. Nothing is pseudocode or hand-wavy.

Workflow Clarity

The Decision Flowchart gives an explicit, unambiguous sequence for the skill's core task (choose a model), which alone would support 5 under the simple-skill exception. What holds it at 4 is the Cost-Aware Agent Usage batch loop: it has no error handling or validation checkpoint (a failed query silently drops out of the loop), so a minor validation gap remains. Not 3, because the batch loop is an illustrative read-only pattern, not the skill's primary workflow, and not 5 because that pattern lacks checkpoints.

Progressive Disclosure

The body is well organized into clearly signaled sections (comparison, per-model guidance, reasoning effort, flowchart, agent usage) with no buried references and no bundle files to navigate. At ~135 lines it exceeds the under-50-lines simple-skill case where sections alone earn a 5; the per-model example commands could live in a references file, so 'good structure, minor organization gaps' is the best fit rather than the fully-split ideal.

Specificity

The description names its domain concretely — "Model selection guide for perplexity-cli ask and chat commands" — but that is a single action (guiding selection), matching the 'names domain and 1-2 concrete actions, not comprehensive' anchor. It does not merit 4, which requires several listed actions; the enumerated model names add scope detail, not additional actions.

Completeness

Both parts are explicit: the 'what' is "Model selection guide for perplexity-cli ask and chat commands" and the 'when' is "Use when choosing between sonar, sonar-pro, sonar-reasoning, and sonar-deep-research" — a concrete trigger clause. This matches the top anchor (clear, explicit what AND when with concrete triggers), not 4 where the 'when' would be less specific.

Trigger Term Quality

Strong keyword coverage: "perplexity-cli", "ask", "chat", and all four model names ("sonar", "sonar-pro", "sonar-reasoning", "sonar-deep-research") are exactly what a user would mention. A few natural terms are missing (e.g., "search" command, "--model" flag, "which model"/"reasoning effort" phrasing), which holds it at the 'good coverage, a few natural terms missing' anchor rather than the comprehensive-synonyms anchor.

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

The description is tightly scoped to one tool's model flag and names the exact models, giving it a clear niche with minimal overlap risk against other skills. Nothing generic remains that would trigger the wrong skill.