Conciseness

The body is lean: syntax tables and code blocks with almost no prose padding, and it explicitly scopes out standard Markdown ("standard Markdown ... is assumed knowledge"). It is not 5 because the Math (LaTeX), Mermaid, and Footnotes sections cover syntax Claude already knows well and could be trimmed or dropped.

Actionability

Every section gives copy-paste-ready Obsidian syntax (wikilink forms, embed variants, callout blocks, a full frontmatter block, a complete end-to-end example note), and "Common types: note, tip, warning..." enumerates the common cases. This fully matches the 'fully executable; copy-paste ready; covers common cases' anchor.

Workflow Clarity

The 'Workflow: Creating an Obsidian Note' section gives a clear 6-step sequence ending with a verification step ("Verify the note renders correctly in Obsidian's reading view"). It is not 5 because that verification is a single light checkpoint with no error-recovery feedback loop, though the skill involves no destructive or batch operations that would cap the score lower.

Progressive Disclosure

SKILL.md is a well-organized overview with core syntax inline, and details are split into three clearly signaled, one-level-deep references ([PROPERTIES.md], [EMBEDS.md], [CALLOUTS.md]) that all exist in references/ and contain no nested references. This matches the 'clear overview with well-signaled one-level-deep references' anchor; it is not 4 because there are no organization gaps.

Specificity

"Create and edit Obsidian Flavored Markdown with wikilinks, embeds, callouts, properties" names the domain and several concrete capability areas, matching the 'several specific actions; minor gaps' anchor. It falls short of 5 because the action verbs are limited to create/edit and "other Obsidian-specific syntax" is a mild hedge, while it exceeds 3 since coverage goes well beyond 1-2 actions.

Completeness

It explicitly answers both: "Create and edit Obsidian Flavored Markdown with wikilinks, embeds, callouts, properties..." (what) and "Use when working with .md files in Obsidian, or when the user mentions..." (when, with concrete trigger phrases). This structurally matches the score-5 anchor example exactly, so 4 (when 'could be more explicit') does not fit.

Trigger Term Quality

"Use when working with .md files in Obsidian, or when the user mentions wikilinks, callouts, frontmatter, tags, embeds, or Obsidian notes" includes natural terms plus a file extension, which is good coverage. It is not 5 because a few natural terms users say are missing (e.g., "vault", "backlinks", "note-taking").

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

Distinctly Obsidian-specific triggers ("wikilinks, callouts, embeds, Obsidian notes") establish a clear niche, but "frontmatter" and "tags" are generic terms that overlap with general markdown and static-site skills, keeping it at 'mostly distinct; minor overlap risk' rather than minimal conflict.