Conciseness

The curated sections (Quick Usage, Prompt config essentials, Notes) are lean, but the ~305-line 'Docs snapshot' re-pastes the same material already summarized above — the test.md example, frontmatter explanation, and prompt-config syntax all appear twice — plus navigation chrome ('Skip to content', sidebar lists of Intro/Config/Providers/...), a footer, and scrape artifacts like 'theutput' and 'ithe command'. This is 'noticeably verbose; several unnecessary explanations or padded sections'. It is not a 1 because the duplicated material is tool-specific (not concepts Claude already knows) and the top sections are efficient.

Actionability

Guidance is mostly copy-paste ready: 'mkdir -p .opencode/commands', a complete example command file with frontmatter, concrete placeholder syntax ('$ARGUMENTS', "!`npm test`", '@src/components/Button.tsx'), and complete JSON config snippets. Minor gaps keep it from 5: no example of verifying a created command actually registers/invokes in the TUI beyond a passing mention, and the two conflicting model values in the examples (gpt-5.2-codex vs anthropic/claude-3-...) are never reconciled.

Workflow Clarity

For a simple single-purpose skill, the flow is unambiguous: create the directory, write the command file with frontmatter, invoke it via /name — and it includes how to pass arguments, inject shell output, and reference files. It does not reach 5 because the duplicated curated-vs-snapshot structure blurs which section is authoritative, and there is no checkpoint confirming the command works after creation. No destructive/batch operations, so the validation cap does not apply.

Progressive Disclosure

There are no bundle files (no references/, scripts/, or assets/ exist), yet ~305 lines of raw pasted documentation — including site navigation and a footer — are inlined directly in SKILL.md, which is nearly the literal anchor-2 example of '[300 lines of API reference that should be in a separate file]'. The external link to https://opencode.ai/docs/commands/ is a clear one-level escape hatch and the curated sections have headers, which keeps it from a 1, but the bulk content clearly belongs in a separate reference file.

Specificity

The description names the domain ('OpenCode custom commands') and one concrete action ('Create'), with a stated purpose ('for repeatable tasks'), but stops there — it never mentions command files, JSON config, prompt templates, or argument placeholders. This matches the anchor 'Names domain and 1-2 concrete actions, but not comprehensive'; it is above anchor 2 because the action is concrete rather than generic like 'Processes PDF files'.

Completeness

The 'what' is clear (create OpenCode custom commands), but there is no 'Use when...' clause or any equivalent trigger guidance, which per the judging guidelines caps completeness at 3. It is not a 2 because the 'what' half is concrete and unambiguous, unlike 'Use when working with documents'.

Trigger Term Quality

It includes relevant keywords ('OpenCode', 'custom commands', 'repeatable tasks') that a user would plausibly say, but misses common variations and specifics: 'slash commands', 'command files', '.opencode/commands', 'prompt templates'. This fits 'Some relevant keywords but missing common variations or synonyms'.

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

'OpenCode custom commands' occupies a clear niche — the tool-specific scope makes confusion with generic skill-creation or other skills unlikely. Minor overlap risk remains with generic 'create commands/aliases' skills since terms like 'slash command' or '.opencode' are absent, so it does not reach the fully distinct anchor 5.