Conciseness

The body assumes Claude's competence — no concept explanations or padding — but contains structural redundancy beyond "minor" trimmings: the 4-line progress checklist is reprinted in full five times, the public-preview disclosure rules appear nearly verbatim in both the Step 3 SaaS guardrail and Step 4a items 3, and the BLOCKED rules inlined at Step 4a duplicate the Core Rule already in references/compatibility-matrix.md. That matches anchor 3 (mostly efficient, could be meaningfully tightened) rather than 4's "minor instances".

Actionability

Fully executable instruction-only guidance: exact question scripts and option sets ("Does this recommendation look right?" with max-4 options), copy-paste warning text, specific grep patterns ("transfers.create", "account.updated", "application_fee_amount"), named embedded components, exact output file ("connect-recommend-plan.md"), and unambiguous decision rules (BLOCKED/CAUTION/SALES-GATED with the fix path). Common cases are covered with concrete scripts, matching anchor 5.

Workflow Clarity

Steps 0-6 are explicitly sequenced with ordering constraints ("ALWAYS runs first", "Run this AFTER Step 1"), a mandatory pre-presentation validation gate (Step 4a compatibility cross-check), explicit feedback loops (BLOCKED → corrected configuration → re-run; "Change something" → re-ask the relevant question), a fee-structure checkpoint before Step 4, and a progress checklist — anchor 5's validation, error-recovery, and checklist requirements are all literally present. The workflow is conversational/consultative, not destructive or batch, so no cap applies.

Progressive Disclosure

All eight references/ files exist, are referenced in the body, are one level deep (no reference file points to another), and are well-signaled at point of need ("Read <references/decision-matrix.md> and map the findings..."). However, the 361-line body inlines material that duplicates the bundle — Step 4a's enumerated compatibility rules restate compatibility-matrix.md's Core Rule, and the ~250-word SaaS guardrail paragraph overlaps discovery-questions.md — so content placement has real gaps versus anchor 5's "appropriately split".

Specificity

The domain is named with rich, concrete vocabulary ("Stripe Connect configuration, charge patterns, Dashboard access", "split payments, revenue sharing, multi-party payments", "onboarding or KYC"), but the only explicit action is "for a recommendation" — what the skill actually does (recommend an integration configuration) is otherwise unstated. This matches anchor 3 (domain plus 1-2 concrete actions, not comprehensive) rather than 4, which requires several listed actions, or 2, whose domain naming would be generic.

Completeness

The "when" is maximally explicit ("Use this skill when the user asks about...") with concrete trigger phrases, but the "what" is only vaguely present via "provides a company URL or business description for a recommendation" — the skill's core function (recommending a Connect configuration) must be inferred. This is not anchor 4 (which needs both present with the 'when' as the weaker side) nor anchor 2 ('when' present with no 'what' at all), so 3 fits best.

Trigger Term Quality

Strong natural-phrase coverage with synonyms ("marketplace, platform, multi-vendor store, gig platform", "pay out sellers, vendors, or providers", "white-label payments, embedded payments") — phrases users would genuinely say. A few natural terms are missing ("account types", "express/custom/standard accounts", "payouts" as a noun) and some triggers lean technical ("responsibility configurations", "charge patterns"), so it sits between anchors 4 and 5, landing at 4.

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

The Stripe Connect niche is clear and triggers are distinct, with a thoughtful carve-out ("not operational SaaS without payment routing") that shows conflict awareness. Minor overlap risk remains with closely related Stripe skills: "subscription platform" could pull in Billing/subscription questions, and "POS, booking, invoicing" examples broaden the surface — matching anchor 4 rather than 5's "minimal conflict risk".