Conciseness

Lean and efficient throughout: it assumes knowledge of Go and the Elm architecture and spends tokens only on the v2 delta ("View returns a tea.View, not a string", "Space is \"space\", not \" \""), and the pitfalls section ("Mistakes that cost time") is entirely non-obvious, hard-won guidance. Version sensitivity is handled structurally via a "Migrating from v1" section and an "Older v2 releases" pointer rather than rotting date-based instructions, so there are no padded or trimmable passages that would warrant a 4.

Actionability

Fully executable guidance: a complete counter program, a complete checkServer command factory with timeout and error handling, and concrete validation commands ("run `go vet ./...` and `go test ./...`"). The `// excerpt` blocks are explicitly labeled API sketches ("`// excerpt` blocks are API sketches"), a justified flexibility, and specific built-ins like `tea.Batch`, `tea.Tick`, `tea.ExecProcess` are enumerated for follow-up in the references.

Workflow Clarity

The 6-step workflow has an explicit validation checkpoint with a feedback loop: "run `go vet ./...` and `go test ./...` from the application module, fix failures, and rerun until both pass. Then try keys and resizing in a real terminal." Step 6 is re-invoked later ("Validate as in workflow step 6") for migration and testing contexts, and no destructive or batch operations are involved that would require additional checkpoints.

Progressive Disclosure

Verified against the actual bundle: all six referenced files (api.md, async.md, compose.md, input.md, screen.md, testing.md) exist in references/, are exactly one level deep, and every link states what it contains (e.g., "Read references/screen.md for a full screen layout, light or dark background detection, and the remaining fields"). Deep anchors resolve against real headings (api.md has "## Migrating from v1" and "## Older v2 releases"), and the bulk API reference is correctly split out while the core loop, view fields, keys, commands, and composing guidance stay inline.

Specificity

Lists multiple specific concrete actions with comprehensive coverage: "Build terminal user interfaces (TUI) in Go", "using the Elm architecture Model, Update, View loop, commands for I/O, and declarative tea.View fields for alt screen, mouse, cursor, and title", plus "writing or migrating", "handling tea.KeyPressMsg or mouse messages", "wiring async work", and "testing one". It names the framework, its import path, its architecture, and its key message types, so it is comprehensive rather than having only minor gaps (score 4).

Completeness

Explicitly answers both what ("Build terminal user interfaces (TUI) in Go with Bubble Tea v2 ... using the Elm architecture Model, Update, View loop") and when ("Use when writing or migrating a Bubble Tea or bubbletea app, handling tea.KeyPressMsg or mouse messages, wiring async work into a TUI, or testing one") with concrete trigger phrases. The 'when' clause is specific and multi-scenario, not merely present as at score 4.

Trigger Term Quality

Covers the natural terms users would say: "terminal user interfaces", "TUI", "Go", "Bubble Tea", and explicitly includes the synonym variation "Bubble Tea or bubbletea app", plus "charmbracelet" and "charm.land/bubbletea/v2". Scenario triggers like "migrating a bubbletea app", "wiring async work into a TUI", and "testing one" round out comprehensive coverage; no natural phrasing is obviously missing (score 4 would require a few missing natural terms).

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

Clear niche (Bubble Tea v2 in Go) with distinct triggers and minimal conflict risk, reinforced by an explicit negative boundary: "Not for ready made widgets (charmed-bubbles), styling (charmed-lipgloss), or forms (charmed-huh)". That exclusion clause disambiguates the nearest neighboring skills, going beyond the 'minor overlap risk' tolerated at score 4.