Conciseness

The body is lean — quick summaries with concrete commands, no explanations of concepts Claude already knows. Not a 5 because the RT-status wait loop is duplicated verbatim in Steps 7 and 11, and the closing 'Summary' section repeats the per-step checkpoint lists already stated inline.

Actionability

Mostly executable curl/tdx/jq commands with real endpoints and payloads (journey creation, activation, stage configuration, launch, verification). Not a 5 because Step 7's quick summary is comment-only pseudocode ('# Configure event tables, key events, RT attributes, ID stitching' with no actual commands), several variables ($JOURNEY_ID, $STAGE_ID, $CONNECTION_ID, $WEBHOOK_URL) are used without being captured from prior command output, and the poll loops have no timeout or failure path.

Workflow Clarity

Clear 13-step sequence with explicit ✓ checkpoints per step, a verification command with expected output ('Expected: "launched"'), and a wait-for-ready gate before launch. Not a 5 because there is no error-recovery/feedback guidance — if RT status never reaches 'ok' or launch fails, the body gives no fix-and-retry direction, and the while-loops spin indefinitely without a timeout.

Progressive Disclosure

Good signaling pattern (each step section links to a steps/XX.md detail file with an inline quick summary), but the referenced files do not exist in this bundle — there is no steps/ directory, only SKILL.md — so all five 'See [steps/...]' links are dangling. Additionally, Steps 1-7 route through steps/01-07-shared-rt-config.md which itself points to three files in ../rt-setup-personalization/steps/, creating a two-level reference chain. Structure and signaling are present, but unverifiable references and the nested chain keep this below 4.

Specificity

The description enumerates multiple concrete actions covering the whole workflow — 'validates parent segment RT status, discovers event tables and attributes, configures RT infrastructure (events, attributes, ID stitching), creates RT journey with activations' — comprehensive coverage from validation through journey creation. Not a 4 because the actions span the entire end-to-end scope with no significant gaps; uses third person voice.

Completeness

Clearly answers both 'what' (validates parent segment, discovers event tables/attributes, configures RT infrastructure, creates RT journey with activations) and 'when' with explicit concrete trigger phrases ('Use when user wants to "create realtime triggers" or "set up RT journey end-to-end"'). Matches the anchor for both what AND when with concrete trigger phrases.

Trigger Term Quality

Natural quoted trigger phrases like 'create realtime triggers' and 'set up RT journey end-to-end' plus synonyms (triggers/journeys, RT 2.0/realtime) give good keyword coverage. Not a 5 because common variations users might say (e.g., 'real-time' with hyphen, 'event triggers', 'TD/CDP realtime') are missing.

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

Clear niche (RT 2.0 journeys/triggers) distinct from generic skills, but the sibling skill rt-setup-personalization shares Steps 1-7 and overlapping 'RT setup' trigger language, creating minor overlap risk when a user just asks to 'set up RT'. Not a 5 due to that closely related sibling; not a 3 because the journey/activation focus is well differentiated from personalization's request-response use case.