Conciseness

The body is dominated by lean, executable commands and tight tables, but the opening paragraph partially duplicates the linked Madge README and the test-exclusion rationale sentence could be trimmed. Not 5: a few tokens do not earn their place; not 3: over-explanation is minor, not 'several unnecessary explanations'.

Actionability

Every step gives copy-paste-ready, fully executable material: install commands per OS, madge CLI invocations with flags, a complete .madgerc JSON config, and GitHub Actions YAML. Specific examples cover the common cases (single entry vs directory, blocking vs advisory CI gates).

Workflow Clarity

Steps 1-6 are clearly sequenced with real checkpoints: documented exit codes for CI, explicit orphan verification ("verify usage outside source tree... before removal"), and an advisory-vs-blocking distinction. Not 5: there is no feedback loop for acting on a detected cycle (e.g., how to break one and re-verify).

Progressive Disclosure

Sections are well organized with no content that belongs in separate files, and the single external reference (the Madge README) is one level deep, clearly linked in-text and repeated in a References section. The destructive-op workflow cap does not apply since orphan handling includes explicit verification guidance.

Specificity

"Runs Madge on production code to find circular dependencies and orphan modules and draw the module graph, excluding test files" lists multiple concrete actions (find cycles, find orphans, draw graph, scope exclusion) with comprehensive coverage of the tool's capabilities in third-person voice. Not 4: there are no meaningful gaps in the action coverage for this tool.

Completeness

Both halves are explicit: an explicit "Use when" clause with two concrete runtime/CI triggers, and a clear statement of what the skill does. Not 4: the 'when' is fully explicit and concrete rather than merely present.

Trigger Term Quality

Phrases like "build compiles but a clearly imported module is undefined at runtime", "circular dependencies", and "import cycles" are natural user phrasings. Not 5: common synonyms such as "circular imports" and file extensions (.ts, .tsx) are absent, so a few natural terms are missing.

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

A clear niche (Madge-based circular-dependency and orphan analysis) with highly specific triggers (undefined import after successful compile; CI cycle gate) that no generic build or linting skill would claim. Minimal conflict risk.