Conciseness

The body is efficient: the ASCII layout tree, the four numbered rules, and per-step "Done when" criteria each earn their place, and it delegates vocabulary to the "codebase-design" skill instead of re-explaining it. Minor over-explanation could be trimmed — the "Entry points, not a barrel" paragraph and the Ousterhout gloss "a lot of behaviour behind a small interface" partially restate what the rules already imply — so it sits at the 4 anchor rather than the lean every-token-counts 5.

Actionability

Most steps are executable — package-manager detection via lockfiles is concrete ("pnpm-lock.yaml → pnpm"), the lint script is specified (`depcruise <packages-root>`), and the violation test gives a literal deep-import line to try. However, step 3 says "Copy [`dependency-cruiser.config.cjs`](./dependency-cruiser.config.cjs) to the repo root" and that file does not exist in the skill bundle, so the centerpiece artifact containing the four rules and the `$1` back-references is not actually available — a missing key detail that drops this below the 4 anchor's "minor gaps".

Workflow Clarity

The seven steps are clearly sequenced, each with an explicit "Done when" checkpoint, and step 6 is a full validation feedback loop: run and pass on the clean example, add a deep import and observe the failure with the named rule `tests-through-entrypoints`, revert and re-pass, with recovery guidance ("If step 2 does not fail, the rules are not wired correctly, so fix before finishing"). This matches the 5 anchor's validate-fix-retry pattern exactly; the 4 anchor's "minor validation gaps" does not apply.

Progressive Disclosure

The single-file body is well organized with clear sections and correctly defers the full rule configuration to a bundle file rather than inlining it, but the one referenced path (`./dependency-cruiser.config.cjs`) does not exist in the bundle — the skill directory contains no references/, scripts/, assets/, or config file at all. Scored against the actual bundle structure, the single one-level-deep reference is broken, so navigation to the key material fails; this is a real organizational gap, not the 4 anchor's "minor organization gaps".

Specificity

The description names concrete actions — "Wire dependency-cruiser into a TypeScript repo", "implementation hidden in subfolders and reachable only through its entry-point files" — which lists several specific capabilities. It falls short of a 5 because it omits concrete outcomes the skill actually delivers (lint script wiring, example package scaffolding, README documentation), leaving minor coverage gaps.

Completeness

The "what" is clear and concrete (wire dependency-cruiser so packages are deep modules with hidden implementation), and "User-invoked" explicitly signals invocation mode, so the "Use when" cap at 3 does not apply. The "when" states who invokes it but not the situations that call for it, which is the "when could be more explicit" case of the 4 anchor rather than the fully concrete trigger phrases of a 5.

Trigger Term Quality

Natural keywords include "TypeScript repo", "package", "deep module", "entry-point files", "subfolders", and the tool name "dependency-cruiser" — good coverage of terms a user would plausibly say when requesting this setup. A few natural synonyms are missing (e.g. "package boundaries", "import rules", "module structure"), so it does not reach the comprehensive synonym coverage of a 5.

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

The pairing of a specific tool ("dependency-cruiser") with a specific target ("TypeScript repo", "deep module", "entry-point files") carves out a clear niche with distinct triggers and virtually no overlap risk with other skills. It is not merely "somewhat specific" as in the 3 anchor; no closely related generic skill would collide with these triggers.