Conciseness

The ~40-line body is lean and assumes competence: every bullet is an instruction (e.g., "Use `git commit --no-verify` for intermediate commits so hooks do not block temporarily incomplete states") with no padding or explanation of concepts Claude already knows. Matches anchor 5's "every token earns its place".

Actionability

Step 1 gives four exact commands (`git branch --show-current`, `git status --short`, `git log main..HEAD --oneline`, `git diff main...HEAD --stat`) and the naming convention `<source-branch>-clean` is concrete. However, the core reimplementation steps are high-level ("Break the implementation into self-contained logical steps", "Use clear commit subjects and descriptions" with no example format), and the verification step gives no command for confirming the branches match — mostly executable with minor gaps, matching anchor 4 rather than fully copy-paste-ready anchor 5.

Workflow Clarity

A clear 9-step sequence with real validation checkpoints: step 2 validates the source branch ("Ensure there are no uncommitted changes or merge conflicts") and step 8 verifies correctness ("Confirm the final clean branch state exactly matches the original source branch", final commit without `--no-verify`). It falls short of anchor 5 because there is no error-recovery feedback loop for the failure case (what to do when the verification finds a mismatch) — anchor 4's "clear sequence with most checkpoints present; minor validation gaps".

Progressive Disclosure

The skill is under 50 lines, needs no external references, and is organized into clean Workflow and Rules sections; PR opening is appropriately delegated to the `pr` skill. Per the rubric's simple-skill guideline, this matches a 5 with just well-organized sections.

Specificity

"Reimplement the current branch on a new branch with a clean, narrative-quality git commit history" names the domain and concrete mechanism ("replaying work", "reviewable commits"). It lists one core action rather than several distinct actions (anchor 5), but as a single-purpose skill the coverage is complete, placing it noticeably above anchor 3's "1-2 concrete actions, but not comprehensive".

Completeness

The what ("Reimplement the current branch on a new branch with a clean, narrative-quality git commit history") and the when ("Use when asked to make a clean copy branch, clean up commit history by replaying work, or rebuild a branch as reviewable commits") are both explicit with concrete trigger phrases, exactly matching anchor 5.

Trigger Term Quality

Trigger phrases "make a clean copy branch", "clean up commit history", "replaying work", and "rebuild a branch as reviewable commits" are natural phrases users would say. A few common synonyms are missing (e.g., "rewrite history", "squash commits", "rebase"), matching anchor 4's "good keyword coverage; a few natural terms missing" rather than anchor 5's comprehensive synonym/extension coverage.

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

It occupies a clear niche — replaying branch work as a clean reviewable history on a new branch — with distinct trigger phrases and minimal conflict risk against related git skills (commit-message generation, PR creation). It matches anchor 5's "clear niche with distinct triggers".