Conciseness

The body is dense with domain-specific data Claude cannot be assumed to know (e.g., 'opt-out (card required) shows 49% conversion', '85% of deployments fail within 6 months', CAC payback by motion), so most tokens earn their place, and there is no tutorial-style explanation of known concepts. It is not 5 because the ~460-line body duplicates content that also appears in references/quick-reference.md (TTFV targets, key ratios, motion cheat sheet), and the roleplay preamble ('You are a go-to-market strategist...') plus section 2E's overlapping tables could be trimmed.

Actionability

Guidance is fully executable as a decision procedure: a scored selection matrix with an explicit rule ('7+ PLG signals = pure PLG. 4-6 = hybrid. 0-3 = sales-led'), quantified PQL triggers ('Seats/usage exceeds free tier by 20%+', 'Admin/billing page visited 3+ times'), numbered TTFV steps (MAP/ELIMINATE/PRELOAD/GUIDE/MEASURE), and a concrete tiered recommendation ('Start Tier 1. Move to Tier 2 after 90+ days... Avoid Tier 3 unless ACV < $1K'). Per the instruction-only scoring note, absence of code is not penalized since the guidance is specific and covers common cases; it is not 4 because thresholds, tools, and expected outcomes are given throughout with no pseudocode-like vagueness.

Workflow Clarity

Sub-workflows are clearly sequenced: 'Before Starting' input gathering with an explicit fallback ('If the user skips inputs, make reasonable assumptions and state them explicitly'), numbered migration paths with triggers and target outcomes ('Target: 25%+ PQL-to-close rate'), and the anti-pattern/fix and troubleshooting tables give error-recovery guidance. It is not 5 because there is no single end-to-end flow tying gather-inputs → score → select motion → apply playbook together, and validation is via red-flag metric tables rather than explicit checkpoints in the workflows; it is above 3 because each sub-process has explicit triggers, targets, and failure modes.

Progressive Disclosure

The body is well-sectioned with headers and the one bundle file is real and exactly one level deep ('read references/quick-reference.md'), but roughly 450 lines of benchmark tables (CAC by motion, industry trial rates, per-archetype funnels) are inlined where a reference split belongs, and the single reference pointer is buried in a trailing one-line paragraph rather than clearly signaled per section. Worse, quick-reference.md largely duplicates body content (motion cheat sheet, TTFV targets, key ratios) instead of extending it — matching the anchor-3 pattern of 'content that should be separate is inline' with weakly signaled references rather than anchor 4's 'most content appropriately placed.'

Specificity

The description lists multiple concrete actions — 'choose between PLG and sales-led, design a sales motion, optimize time-to-first-value, or build a value-before-purchase experience' — and closes the coverage loop with 'This skill covers sales motion selection, value delivery design, and go-to-market motion architecture.' This matches the anchor-5 exemplar (multiple specific concrete actions, comprehensive coverage); it is not score 4 because coverage of the domain is complete with no gaps, and every clause names a distinct capability rather than padding.

Completeness

Both questions are answered explicitly: 'when' via 'When the user wants to...' and 'Also use when the user mentions...' with concrete trigger phrases, and 'what' via 'This skill covers sales motion selection, value delivery design, and go-to-market motion architecture.' This mirrors the anchor-5 exemplar almost exactly; a missing or only-implied 'when' clause would cap it at 3, but the trigger guidance is explicit and first-positioned.

Trigger Term Quality

It enumerates eleven natural trigger terms users would actually say — 'PLG,' 'product-led growth,' 'sales-led,' 'sales motion,' 'free trial,' 'freemium,' 'self-serve,' 'demo-first,' 'time-to-first-value,' 'TTFV,' and 'agent-led sales' — including abbreviations and synonyms (PLG/product-led growth, TTFV/time-to-first-value), matching the comprehensive synonym coverage of the anchor-5 example. It does not fall to 4 because no common natural phrasing for this domain is conspicuously missing.

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

The GTM/sales-motion niche is distinct with domain-specific triggers (PLG, PQL-adjacent vocabulary, freemium, TTFV), and the negative boundary 'Do NOT use for technical implementation, code review, or software architecture' explicitly fences off the most likely conflict areas. This matches the anchor-5 'clear niche with distinct triggers; minimal conflict risk'; score 4 would require some residual overlap ambiguity that the DO-NOT clause already resolves.