Conciseness

The body is mostly efficient — scannable tables, bulleted 'Key insights', and details deferred to references — but includes unnecessary material: each 'Why it works' paragraph restates general knowledge ('customers are poor predictors of their own future behavior'), the 'About the Author' bio ('internationally acclaimed author, speaker, and coach...') and the affiliate-tagged Amazon link ('tag=wondelai00-20') earn no operational value, and 'Core Principle' repeats the intro. This fits anchor 3 ('mostly efficient but includes some unnecessary explanation or could be tightened') rather than 4, where over-explanation would be only minor.

Actionability

For an instruction-only skill the guidance is concrete: specific interview phrasing ('"Tell me about the last time you..." not "Would you use a feature that...?"'), a named assumption 2x2 ('importance (how critical if wrong) vs. evidence (how much we know)'), named test designs ('one-question surveys, painted-door tests, prototype tests, data mining'), and quantified table examples ('60% on high-confidence opportunity, 30% on medium, 10% on exploratory'). It falls short of anchor 5 only because a few directives remain advisory ('Assess alignment with company strategy') without a concrete method, which the body defers to references.

Workflow Clarity

Each practice has clear internal sequencing (assumption testing: map by type → plot on 2x2 → test high-importance/low-evidence first → 'Set clear success criteria before running the test') and the Quick Diagnostic supplies an explicit question/if-no/action checklist, but the skill never sequences the six practices into an adoption path — there is no 'start here, then do X' — and checkpoints exist only in the diagnostic table. That matches anchor 3 ('sequence present but checkpoints missing or implicit') better than 4, which expects most checkpoints woven into the workflow itself. No destructive/batch operations, so no cap applies.

Progressive Disclosure

The body is a genuine overview with six one-level-deep references, each signaled in-place ('See: [references/opportunity-trees.md](references/opportunity-trees.md)') and again in a 'Reference Files' section with per-file descriptions; all six files exist in ./references/ with content matching their labels. This matches the anchor-5 example structure (clear overview, well-signaled single-level references, easy navigation) — no nested references, no bulk detail inlined that belongs in a bundle file.

Specificity

The description lists several concrete capabilities: 'Build a weekly cadence of customer touchpoints using Opportunity Solution Trees, assumption mapping, and interview snapshots' plus 'Covers experience mapping, co-creation, and prioritizing opportunities'. It falls short of anchor 5's 'comprehensive coverage' because the actions are named framework areas rather than distinct concrete operations, and 'co-creation' and 'connecting discovery insights to delivery work' are stated without any concrete action; it is clearly above anchor 3, which expects only 1-2 concrete actions.

Completeness

It explicitly answers both questions: 'what' in the opening sentence (build a weekly cadence of touchpoints using OSTs, assumption mapping, interview snapshots) and 'when' via an explicit 'Use when the user mentions...' clause with concrete quoted trigger phrases and additional behavioral conditions. This mirrors the anchor-5 example structure exactly; nothing is merely implied.

Trigger Term Quality

Trigger coverage is comprehensive and natural: seven quoted phrases users would actually say ('"continuous discovery"', '"opportunity solution tree"', '"weekly interviews"', '"assumption testing"', '"discovery habits"', '"product trio"', '"outcome-based roadmap"') plus behavioral triggers ('setting up regular customer feedback loops, prioritizing which experiments to run, or connecting discovery insights to delivery work'). This matches anchor 5's comprehensive coverage including synonyms and variations.

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

The niche is distinct — the primary triggers ('continuous discovery', 'opportunity solution tree', 'product trio') belong to this skill alone — and it proactively de-conflicts siblings ('For interview technique, see mom-test. For team structure, see inspired-product.'). It stays at anchor 4 rather than 5 because the secondary behavioral triggers ('setting up regular customer feedback loops', 'prioritizing which experiments to run') are broad enough to overlap with general feedback-loop, experimentation, or prioritimization skills.