The body is lean: a one-line intro, a prerequisite check, one execution command, concise parse targets with concrete URL examples, and a short degradation note. It never explains concepts Claude already knows, so every token earns its place. It is not 2 because there is no unnecessary explanation to tighten.

It gives executable commands ("git rev-parse --is-inside-work-tree 2>/dev/null", "git config --get remote.origin.url"), concrete HTTPS/SSH URL formats, and an exact warning string — copy-paste ready. It is not 2 because the guidance is real commands with complete examples rather than pseudocode.

A clear Prerequisites → Execution → Output → Graceful Degradation sequence with a prerequisite guard (warn and return empty if Git is absent) and a CAUTION correctness check. As a simple read-only detection task this is unambiguous, so per the simple-skill note it earns 3. It is not 2 because checkpoints are explicit, not implicit.

The skill is under 50 lines, single-purpose, with no bundle files (references/scripts/assets absent) and no need for external references, yet it is organized into well-labeled sections. Per the simple-skill guidance this earns 3. It is not 2 because organization is clean with no nested or dangling references.

"Detect Git remote URL for GitHub integration" names a concrete action (detect the remote URL) and a domain (GitHub integration), but lists only a single action rather than multiple specific capabilities. It is not 3 because it is not comprehensive, and not 1 because it does state a concrete action and domain.

The "what" is clearly stated (detect the Git remote URL), but "for GitHub integration" is a purpose, not an explicit "Use when..." trigger; per the guidelines a missing trigger clause caps completeness at 2. It is not 3 because no explicit trigger guidance is given, and not 1 because the what is clear and a purpose is implied.

The phrase includes relevant natural terms ("Git remote URL", "GitHub") a user might say, but coverage is thin with no common variations (e.g., remote, repository, git config). It is not 3 because keyword coverage is limited to one clause, and not 1 because the terms present are natural rather than jargon.

The GitHub-remote niche is somewhat specific, but with no distinct trigger language it could overlap with other general Git skills that also inspect remotes. It is not 3 because it lacks distinct trigger phrasing, and not 1 because it does target a specific GitHub-oriented task.