Conciseness

Purely operational content — exact menu blocks, bash snippets, and two lookup tables ("Quick Reference", "Common Rationalizations") — with no explanation of git concepts Claude already knows; every section adds non-obvious, workflow-specific constraints. The Common Rationalizations table targets LLM failure modes rather than padding, so it earns its tokens.

Actionability

Copy-paste-ready commands throughout ("GIT_DIR=$(cd "$(git rev-parse --git-dir)" 2>/dev/null && pwd -P)", "git worktree remove \"$WORKTREE_PATH\"") plus verbatim user-facing menu text. The one flexible step (PR creation "with the forge's tooling — its CLI if one is available, or the creation URL most forges print") is explicitly justified flexibility, not pseudocode.

Workflow Clarity

Steps 1–6 are clearly sequenced with explicit validation checkpoints on every risky path: tests must be green before the menu, merged-result tests must pass before cleanup ("nothing has been pushed, so the merge is local and recoverable"), discard requires a typed "discard" confirmation, and worktree-removal refusal triggers a file-status triage menu. Feedback loops are present for all destructive operations, matching the anchor-5 example.

Progressive Disclosure

Well-organized single-file structure with clear section headers and a Quick Reference table, but all content is inline with no reference split — the 220-line body exceeds the under-50-line simple-skill exception, and sections like "Common Rationalizations" could live in a references/ file. Not 5 because the anchor expects well-signaled one-level-deep references or an appropriately small single file; not 3 because what is inline is cohesively organized and navigable.

Specificity

Lists multiple concrete actions — "Verify tests pass", "merge locally, push and open a pull request, or keep it as-is", "execute the choice, and clean up the worktree safely" — with comprehensive coverage of the skill's behavior. Not 4 because there are no gaps in coverage of the actions it performs.

Completeness

Explicitly answers both questions: the what ("Verify tests pass, then present the integration options... execute the choice, and clean up the worktree safely") and the when ("Use it only after implementation is verified and only when the user has authorized an integration decision, for example by saying 'finish this branch'..."). Matches the anchor-5 example structure exactly.

Trigger Term Quality

Includes natural phrases users would actually say — "finish this branch", "merge my work", "open a PR" — which go beyond domain jargon. Not 5 because common synonyms like "land my changes", "integrate", or "ship it" are absent; not 3 because concrete natural trigger phrasings are explicitly quoted.

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

Clear niche ("internal integration stage of the delivery-flow workflow") with explicit negative scoping — "never activate it directly for an unrelated standalone request" — minimizing overlap with generic branch-management or PR skills.