Conciseness

The body is dense and tool-specific (commands, flag tables, notes on API costs and dedup) with no explanation of concepts Claude already knows — VCP theory is correctly deferred to references. However, the intro line ("Screen S&P 500 stocks for Mark Minervini's VCP, identifying Stage 2 uptrend stocks with contracting volatility...") and the "When to Use" bullets largely duplicate the frontmatter description, so a few sections could be trimmed — the anchor-4 "minor instances that could be trimmed" rather than anchor-5's "every token earns its place".

Actionability

Every mode has copy-paste-ready bash invocations with concrete flags: default screening, custom universe, --full-sp500, --strict, three historical-mode variants, and advanced tuning, supplemented by parameter tables giving defaults and valid ranges (e.g. "--min-contractions | 2 | 2-4"). This covers all common cases exactly as the anchor-5 example does.

Workflow Clarity

The four-step sequence (run → review results → present analysis → actionable guidance) is clear and the execution-state/rating decision tables are excellent, but there are no validation or error-recovery checkpoints. This is a batch operation (~101+100 API calls per the 3-Phase Pipeline against a 250-call/day free tier, so quota exhaustion mid-run is a realistic failure), and the rubric caps workflow_clarity at 3 for batch operations missing validate/fix/retry loops — e.g., verifying the timestamped output files were created before presenting, or handling FMP rate-limit errors.

Progressive Disclosure

The body is a proper overview: methodology, scoring thresholds, and API endpoints live in the three referenced files (all present in the bundle, one level deep), signaled both in Step 2 and in a Resources section. The inline content (commands, flag tables) is operational and belongs in SKILL.md, so the split is appropriate and navigation is easy — matching the anchor-5 example structure.

Specificity

The description lists multiple concrete actions covering both modes comprehensively: "Screen S&P 500 stocks", "detect historical VCPs in a single ticker's price path", "Identifies Stage 2 uptrend stocks forming tight bases with contracting volatility near breakout pivot points", and "emits every VCP that formed with forward-outcome stats (breakout / stop-hit / timeout)". This matches the anchor for multiple specific concrete actions with comprehensive coverage, not the score-4 anchor of minor gaps.

Completeness

It explicitly answers both questions: the "what" (two-sentence capability description of screening and historical detection with forward-outcome stats) and the "when" ("Use when user requests VCP screening, Minervini-style setups...") with concrete trigger phrases. This is a direct match for the anchor-5 example structure; a 4 would need a less explicit "when" clause.

Trigger Term Quality

"VCP screening, Minervini-style setups, tight base patterns, volatility contraction breakout candidates, Stage 2 momentum stock scanning, or historical VCP pattern study on a specific ticker (e.g. FIX, TSLA)" comprehensively covers the natural synonyms a user would say for this niche, including concrete example tickers. No natural term within the domain is missing; score 4 would require identifiable gaps, which there aren't.

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

The niche is unambiguous — Mark Minervini's VCP, Stage 2, volatility contraction — with triggers anchored in that domain, so risk of firing for an unrelated skill is minimal. Generic-sounding fragments like "tight base patterns" are always bound to the VCP/Minervini context, keeping it above the score-4 "minor overlap risk" anchor.