Conciseness

The body is lean and command/flag-focused throughout (e.g., "Pick Tesseract first. Switch only when accuracy is unacceptable.", "Xberg fails fast with a helpful error... Read the error — it names the missing file.") with no explanation of concepts Claude already knows and no padded sections. Every section adds CLI-specific knowledge, matching the 'lean and efficient' anchor.

Actionability

All guidance is executable and copy-paste ready: concrete commands ("xberg extract scan.pdf --force-ocr=true", "brew install tesseract-lang", "sudo apt install tesseract-ocr-deu..."), a backend comparison table with exact flags, a complete xberg.toml example, and specific failure-mode fixes. Common cases (force-OCR, multi-language, backend choice, troubleshooting) are all covered.

Workflow Clarity

A clear decision flow (when to force OCR → backend choice → language packs → troubleshoot) is present, and 'Common failure modes' provides symptom→cause→fix recovery loops (e.g., empty content → bogus zero-width text layer → re-run with --force-ocr=true). However, there is no explicit validation checkpoint such as verifying extracted output is non-empty/readable, and the batch tip lacks a verification step — so it falls short of the explicit-validation 5 anchor but above the implicit-checkpoint 3 anchor.

Progressive Disclosure

Sections are well organized and the detail is appropriately split for a single-purpose CLI skill, with a clearly signaled closing pointer for deeper material. However, the body has no reference files of its own — the pointer resolves to "references/cli-reference.md and references/configuration.md in the sibling xberg skill", which are not part of this bundle and may dangle if that skill is absent. This is good structure with minor organization gaps rather than the fully self-contained clear-overview 5 anchor.

Specificity

The description names the domain and one concrete action ("extracting text from scanned PDFs, photographed pages, or images that have no embedded text layer") plus several specific capability areas ("OCR backends, language packs, force-OCR, and performance tuning"). It lists several specifics with minor gaps rather than the multiple concrete actions of the 5 anchor, and is clearly above the '1-2 concrete actions' of the 3 anchor.

Completeness

Both questions are explicitly answered: the 'when' via a concrete trigger clause ("Use when extracting text from scanned PDFs, photographed pages, or images that have no embedded text layer") and the 'what' via the enumerated capabilities ("Covers OCR backends, language packs, force-OCR, and performance tuning"). This mirrors the rubric's 5-anchor pattern; the 4 anchor's weaker/'could be more explicit' when-clause does not apply.

Trigger Term Quality

Natural user phrases are present: "scanned PDFs", "photographed pages", "images", "text layer", "OCR". A few natural terms users would say are missing (e.g., "screenshots", "searchable PDF", image file extensions), which matches the 'good coverage, a few natural terms missing' anchor rather than the comprehensive 5.

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

The niche is sharp — OCR specifically for documents with no embedded text layer — which distinguishes it from general PDF-extraction skills. Triggers like 'scanned PDFs' and 'photographed pages' are distinct, giving minimal conflict risk, matching the clear-niche 5 anchor.