Conciseness

The body is lean with no explanation of concepts Claude already knows; the "work/inputs/" vs "out/" staging paragraph is genuinely non-obvious operational context. However, Example 2 repeats Example 1 verbatim with only filenames changed, which is minor trimmable redundancy — efficient with minor instances that could be trimmed, matching the level-4 anchor rather than the every-token-earns-its-place level 5.

Actionability

All three examples are fully executable, copy-paste-ready bash commands with exact argument order (verified against scripts/summarize_file.sh's two-argument usage), covering the common cases: an existing workspace file, a differently named input, and a file produced by another skill. This matches the anchor for fully executable commands whose examples cover the common cases.

Workflow Clarity

This is a simple single-task skill with an unambiguous single action: one script, two arguments, exact invocation syntax shown. Per the simple-skill exception the workflow can score 5 when the single action is unambiguous, which it is; the operation is neither destructive nor batch, so the validation-cap rule does not apply.

Progressive Disclosure

The body is under 50 lines with well-organized sections (Overview, Examples, Output Files) and no need for external reference files; the single referenced bundle path, scripts/summarize_file.sh, exists and matches the documented usage. Per the under-50-lines guideline, well-organized sections alone earn the top score.

Specificity

"user-provided text files" names the domain and "summarization" gives one concrete action, but "Simple operations" is generic and the other capabilities the body documents (basic statistics, preview capture) are absent. This matches the anchor for naming a domain with 1-2 concrete actions without comprehensive coverage, not the level above which requires several specific listed actions.

Completeness

The description answers "what" ("operations on user-provided text files including summarization") but contains no "Use when..." clause or equivalent trigger guidance, which caps completeness at 3 per the judging guidelines. The "what" is concrete enough to sit at the cap rather than drop to the vague-what/no-when anchor at 2.

Trigger Term Quality

Natural phrases like "summarization" and "text files" are present, but common variations users would actually say are missing ("summarize", "word count", "file stats", ".txt", "preview"). Keyword coverage is relevant but incomplete, matching the anchor for some relevant keywords missing common variations rather than the sparse-generic level below or the good-coverage level above.

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

"User-provided text files" narrows the scope beyond a fully generic claim, but the description would plausibly trigger for any summarization or text-file-processing skill. It sits at the somewhat-specific-but-overlapping anchor, below the mostly-distinct level which would require more distinguishing trigger phrases.