The body is lean and assumes Claude's competence — it never explains what a domain model or ADR is — with every section earning its place; the brief opening clarification nudges but does not cross into verbosity, matching the level-3 anchor.

It gives concrete file paths (CONTEXT.md, docs/adr/, CONTEXT-MAP.md), copy-ready dialogue examples ('Your glossary defines "cancellation" as X, but you seem to mean Y'), and a specific 3-criteria ADR gate; for an instruction-only skill this is concrete and actionable per the rubric's code-vs-instruction note.

The 'During the session' subsections are sequenced (challenge → sharpen → discuss → cross-reference → update inline → offer ADRs) and the ADR criteria act as a gate, but the steps are behavioral guidelines rather than a hardened process with explicit validation checkpoints, matching the level-2 anchor.

The body is well-sectioned and signals one-level-deep references via '使用 [CONTEXT-FORMAT.md](./CONTEXT-FORMAT.md) 中的格式' and [ADR-FORMAT.md](./ADR-FORMAT.md), but neither referenced file exists in the bundle, so the disclosure leads to dead links rather than detail, which keeps it below level 3.

Quotes '构建并打磨项目的领域模型' name the domain and a core action (build/refine), but do not enumerate multiple concrete actions as the level-3 anchor requires; it sits above level 1 because it is not vague.

It answers both what ('构建并打磨项目的领域模型') and when via an explicit trigger clause ('适用于...时'), satisfying the level-3 anchor; it is not capped at 2 because an explicit Use-when-style trigger is present.

The clause '适用于用户想明确领域术语或通用语言、记录架构决策' supplies several trigger conditions, but '通用语言' (ubiquitous language) and '领域模型' are DDD jargon and common phrasings are under-covered, matching the level-2 anchor.

Domain modeling with triggers like domain terms, ubiquitous language, and architecture decisions is a clear niche unlikely to fire for unrelated skills, matching the level-3 anchor.