The body is mostly compact and does not over-explain concepts Claude already knows, but the literal placeholder "[... Content continues as above for full 500+ lines ...]" plus the emoji flourish "Ready for Clinical Use 🎉" are tokens that do not earn their place; not 3 because it could be tightened, not 1 because it is not padded with tutorial-level explanation.

Gives some concrete specifications — file name template `DDI_risk_report_[DRUG1]_[DRUG2].md`, "Initialize with all 9 section headers", evidence symbols ★★★/★★☆/★☆☆, risk score 0-100, severity Major/Moderate/Minor — but the 9 section headers and the actual analysis steps are absent (truncated by the placeholder), so key details are missing; not 1 because guidance is more than abstract description, not 3 because nothing is copy-paste ready and the template is incomplete.

A high-level sequence exists (create report first, progressively update, final deliverable) and the "Success Criteria" checklist acts as a final validation checkpoint, but the core analysis workflow (mechanism assessment, data gathering, scoring) is in the truncated region and not visible; not 1 because a sequence and checklist are present, not 3 because intermediate validation checkpoints and the detailed step sequence are missing.

The body is organized into clear sections (When to Use, Critical Workflow Requirements, Success Criteria) with no external bundle files (references/scripts/assets absent), but it is monolithic and the truncated placeholder indicates content that should exist is not actually present; not 3 because the single-file structure is incomplete rather than a clean overview, not 1 because sectioning is reasonable and there are no deeply nested references.

Lists multiple concrete actions — "Analyzes interaction mechanisms (CYP450, transporters, pharmacodynamic), severity classification, clinical evidence grading, and provides management strategies" plus "Supports single drug pairs, polypharmacy analysis (3+ drugs), and alternative drug recommendations" — matching the anchor for several specific concrete actions.

Clearly answers both what (DDI prediction, mechanism analysis, severity, evidence grading, management) and when via an explicit "Use when..." trigger clause, matching the top anchor; not 2 because the trigger guidance is explicit rather than implied.

The "Use when users ask about drug interactions, medication safety, polypharmacy risks" clause uses natural terms a clinician would actually say; not the level below because coverage is broad rather than missing common variations, despite some jargon in "DDI assessment for clinical decision support".

Occupies a clear clinical niche (drug-drug interaction risk assessment) with distinct triggers unlikely to fire for unrelated skills; uses third person ("Analyzes", "Supports", "Provides") with no voice penalty.