Conciseness

Several padded sections unrelated to figure generation: the 'Before each reviewer slot' blockquote on reviewer-backend routing, and the 5-layer path-resolution chain narrating 'Phase 3.1 (Arch C) move', 'pre-Phase-3.1 layout', and install_aris_codex.sh re-run instructions — time-sensitive version/migration detail not placed in a deprecated section. Not 3 because this is more than 'some' unnecessary explanation; not 1 because the core workflow, schema, and patterns sections are lean and assume competence.

Actionability

Concrete executable commands throughout: 'python3 "$FIGURE_RENDERER" render <spec.json> --output <out.svg>', 'validate', 'schema', and 'rsvg-convert -f pdf', plus a complete copy-paste resolution script. Not 5 because the architecture JSON template contains '...' placeholder elisions and the 'spawn_agent' review invocation is a text sketch rather than an executable command.

Workflow Clarity

Steps 1-5 are clearly sequenced with 'Validate first' as an explicit checkpoint, feedback loops for error recovery ('If validation fails, inspect the error … and fix the JSON'; 'edit the JSON spec (never the generated SVG) and re-render'), a visual review checklist, and iterate-until thresholds (all axes ≥ 7/10). Matches the anchor-5 pattern fully.

Progressive Disclosure

Section headers are clear, but heavy operational machinery (reviewer routing policy, review tracing policy, the 5-layer tool resolution chain) is inlined in SKILL.md where it belongs in reference files, and the 'shared-references/' links point outside the skill bundle with no reference files present within it. Not 4 because content that should be separate is inline and the out-of-bundle references are not verifiable in the bundle structure.

Specificity

Names the concrete transformation 'from structured JSON (FigureSpec) into editable SVG' with diagram types and output qualities — several specific actions with minor coverage gaps (validation and PDF conversion unmentioned). Not 3 because it goes beyond 1-2 generic actions; not 5 because it is essentially one generate-action with qualifiers rather than a comprehensive action list.

Completeness

Explicitly answers both: what ('Generate deterministic publication-quality architecture, workflow, and pipeline diagrams from structured JSON (FigureSpec) into editable SVG') and when ('Use when user says …') with concrete trigger phrases. Matches the anchor-5 example pattern exactly.

Trigger Term Quality

Good natural coverage across languages — 'draw architecture', 'workflow 图', 'pipeline 图', 'figure spec', '确定性矢量图' — phrases a user would actually say. Not 5 because common synonyms like 'system diagram', 'topology', 'flowchart', or 'SVG' are absent.

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

Clear niche (deterministic, editable, publication-ready vector diagrams) with an explicit preference statement ('Preferred over AI illustration for formal architecture/workflow figures'). Not 5 because triggers like 'workflow 图' and 'draw architecture' could still overlap with lighter flowchart/diagram skills that the description does not differentiate.