Conciseness

There is no padding or explanation of concepts Claude already knows, but single sentences carry many rules at once — e.g. Render step 8 packs publish routing, checkout fork rules, the `--new` flow, Defaults rows, page-reading rules, pinning and Codex behavior into one paragraph. Mostly efficient but could be materially tightened, fitting the 3 anchor better than 4, where only minor trimming would be needed.

Actionability

Quotes: "node .agents/pstack/plan-page.mjs <plan> --check", "gh pr view <number> --json body --jq .body > <run directory>/body.md", "gh pr edit <number> --body-file <file>", "--attach", "--public", "--into" — concrete, copy-paste-ready commands with placeholders and a YAML example. Not 5 because execution repeatedly depends on context the file does not define ("the block's Plan pages rule", "pstack:bro", "sync-pstack's Lesson mode"), leaving gaps for a reader outside that ecosystem.

Workflow Clarity

Quotes: "Walk [Check](#check)'s reading list before the first publish and after each revision", "It refuses every shape it can check and names the fix. Fix the plan or the subject file, never the HTML", plus a numbered Repair workflow — explicit validation checkpoints and a refuse-then-fix feedback loop are present. Not 5 because sequencing is blurred by cross-references ("Render steps 5, 7 and 8", "Render steps 3 to 6") and delegation to external rules ("as the Plan pages rule says"), so several checkpoints are implicit rather than self-contained.

Progressive Disclosure

The body is an overview with a mode table, and the single reference is well-signaled and one level deep: "Read [references/shape.md](references/shape.md) before writing a plan or a subject file. It holds every file shape, the page order and the renderer's refusals" — and shape.md exists with exactly those sections. Not 5 because substantial detail (publish routing in step 8, the PR-comment subsection) stays inline where a further reference split would ease navigation, a minor organization gap per the 4 anchor.

Specificity

Quotes: "Write, check, repair and publish a plan page", "rendered by .agents/pstack/plan-page.mjs", "one local HTML page per subject with a local index", "write or update a PR body", "a comment about your commits on someone else's PR". Multiple concrete actions comprehensively cover every mode of the skill, matching the 5 anchor rather than 4, whose coverage would have minor gaps.

Completeness

Quotes: what — "Write, check, repair and publish a plan page ... rendered as one local HTML page per subject ... published to claude.ai"; when — "Use before writing or changing a plan ... at every stop that hands back work with a plan ... before writing or updating a PR body ... when a plan page ... refuses to render ... to republish a page". Both what and when are answered explicitly with concrete trigger phrases, exactly the 5 anchor.

Trigger Term Quality

Quotes: "Use before writing or changing a plan", "when a plan page or its claude.ai artifact looks wrong or refuses to render", "to republish a page" — good explicit trigger coverage, but phrases like "a review verdict other than a review-only panel's" and "a playbook's close" are ecosystem jargon rather than natural user phrasing, with no synonyms or extensions. Not 5 (missing natural-term variations); clearly above 3 (most relevant triggers are present and explicit).

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

Quotes: "a plan page", "which renders from the PR's plan", "the renderer" — a clear niche with distinct triggers, but "before writing or changing a plan" and "a comment about your commits on someone else's PR" could also fire for generic planning or PR-comment skills. Minor overlap with closely related skills fits the 4 anchor; not 5 because that overlap is real.