Conciseness

The body is an efficient ~45-line, section-structured overview that defers detail to the reference file. Minor trimmable redundancy keeps it below anchor 5: the opening sentence ("Terms of Service protect your business by limiting liability, establishing jurisdiction...") duplicates rule.md's "Why It Matters" verbatim, and the clickwrap/acceptance point appears three times (Quick Reference, Check, and Fix). It is well above anchor 3 since nearly every token carries information.

Actionability

Check and Fix give concrete, executable directives: "Check whether the website footer contains a link to a Terms of Service page", "Verify the link is present on all pages including interior pages", "add an explicit acceptance checkbox during registration", "Ensure the terms page has a stable URL". Per the rubric's code-vs-instruction note, absence of inline code is not penalized. It falls short of anchor 5 because there is no inline example and no specified method for verifying link presence across all pages, leaving a small execution gap.

Workflow Clarity

A clear Check → Fix → Explain → Code Review sequence is present, with verification embedded in both Check ("Check that during user registration there is a checkbox") and Code Review ("verify them against the effective production-like response"). This matches anchor 4 (clear sequence, most checkpoints, minor validation gaps) rather than 5 because there is no explicit feedback loop — nothing says to re-check after applying the Fix. The skill involves no destructive or batch operations, so no cap applies.

Progressive Disclosure

The body is a concise, well-organized overview and all implementation detail (HTML examples, clause tables, URL conventions) is correctly pushed to a single, clearly signaled, one-level-deep reference: "see `references/rule.md`", which exists in the bundle and contains exactly the promised detail. This matches anchor 5 — clear overview, well-signaled single reference, easy navigation.

Specificity

The description names the domain and one concrete action — "reviewing whether a website or web application has a visible Terms of Service link accessible from every page" — but does not enumerate the additional checks the skill actually covers (footer placement, registration acceptance checkbox, terms freshness). It sits at anchor 3 (domain plus 1-2 concrete actions, not comprehensive) rather than 4, which requires several listed actions; it clears anchor 2 because the review action is specifically defined, not generic.

Completeness

Both elements are explicit: the 'what' ("reviewing whether a website... has a visible Terms of Service link accessible from every page") and the 'when' ("Use when reviewing..."). It falls short of anchor 5 because 'what' and 'when' are fused into a single clause with no varied concrete trigger phrases (e.g., "or when the user mentions..."), and it exceeds anchor 3 because neither element is missing or merely implied.

Trigger Term Quality

Relevant natural terms are present ("Terms of Service", "website", "web application", "link"), but common variations users would actually say are missing: "ToS", "terms and conditions", and "footer". This matches anchor 3 (some relevant keywords, missing common variations or synonyms); it is not 4 because more than just a few natural terms are absent, and not 2 because the terms included are specific rather than generic filler.

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

The description carves out a clear niche — auditing Terms of Service link discoverability — with triggers distinct from sibling legal-link rules (privacy policy, cookie policy). "Terms of Service" is a specific, unambiguous trigger term, so conflict risk is minimal, matching anchor 5.