The body is mostly efficient and avoids explaining concepts Claude already knows, but the 'Key Rules' section restates guidance already embedded in the phases (e.g. 'Defend simplicity explicitly', 'Prefer strong baselines over long baseline lists') and constants like DEFAULT_SEEDS and MAX_BASELINE_FAMILIES are declared but not consistently used in the workflow. It is not a 3 because of this repetition and an unused constant; it is not a 1 because there is no padding or concept-explaining fluff and most sections earn their place.

Provides concrete per-block specification fields (dataset/split, metrics, success criterion, failure interpretation, table target) and copy-paste-ready output templates with explicit table schemas for EXPERIMENT_PLAN.md and EXPERIMENT_TRACKER.md plus a user-facing summary. It is not a 2 because the guidance is specific and template-driven rather than pseudocode or abstract; not a 1 because it instructs rather than merely describes.

A clearly sequenced Phase 0–5 flow plus a milestone run-order structure with explicit decision gates, stop/go criteria, risk mitigations, and a final checklist. It is not a 2 because validation/checkpoint sequencing is explicit rather than implicit; the destructive/batch cap does not apply since this is a planning skill.

The body is well-organized into named sections and references shared protocols via clearly signaled one-level links (output-versioning.md, output-manifest.md, output-language.md), but no bundle files exist and the referenced shared-references paths are external to the skill, while large output-template content is kept inline rather than split into separate referenced files. It is not a 1 because organization is good and references are one level deep, not nested; it is not a 3 because content that could be separate files is inline and the referenced protocol files are not present in the bundle to verify.

Names multiple concrete actions — 'Turn a refined research proposal...into a detailed, claim-driven experiment roadmap' and lists concrete deliverables (ablation matrix, evaluation protocol, run order, compute budget, paper-ready validation). It is not a 2 because the action set is comprehensive rather than naming only a domain and a few actions.

Explicitly answers both what ('Turn a refined research proposal...into a detailed...roadmap') and when ('Use after `research-refine`, or when the user asks for...'). It is not a 2 because the 'when' is an explicit trigger clause, not merely implied.

Covers natural researcher phrasings — 'detailed experiment plan, ablation matrix, evaluation protocol, run order, compute budget, paper-ready validation' — plus model-family variants (LLM / VLM / Diffusion / RL). It is not a 2 because common variations are well covered rather than missing.

Occupies a clear niche (paper-oriented, claim-driven experiment roadmaps) and is anchored to a pipeline position via 'Use after `research-refine`', making wrong-skill triggering unlikely. It is not a 2 because the triggers are specific to planning rather than the generic overlap a 2 would risk.