Conciseness

The body is lean and assumes Claude's competence — no explanation of git basics, and every action type is taught by example rather than prose. 'The Problem You Solve' is motivational framing and 'Git Workflows' states things Claude already knows about merges/rebases, which keeps it below anchor 5, but the padding is minor — anchor 4, not 3, since the bulk is dense and signal-bearing.

Actionability

Fully executable guidance: an exact line grammar ('action-type(scope): description'), a concrete command ('git diff --cached --stat'), and worked examples spanning simple, moderate, complex, and mid-pivot cases with realistic action lines. Matches anchor 5 — copy-paste-ready patterns covering the common cases; not 4 because there are no gaps in the guidance for the skill's core task.

Workflow Clarity

'Before You Write the Commit' gives a clearly sequenced, branching procedure (staged-vs-unstaged, has-context-vs-lacks-context) with an explicit check step, and the Rules section doubles as a checklist. Missing an explicit final validation pass (e.g., re-check the commit scope before writing) puts it at anchor 4 rather than 5. Commits are not destructive/batch operations, so the workflow-clarity cap for missing validation does not apply.

Progressive Disclosure

A single-file skill with no bundle files (no references/, scripts/, or assets/ exist) and no dangling or dead references — all sections are well-organized and navigable. Anchor 4 rather than 5 because the ~180-line body keeps the full action-type catalogue and four multi-line example blocks inline, some of which (the examples) could live one level deep in a separate reference file.

Specificity

Names several concrete, domain-specific actions — 'Write contextual commits that capture intent, decisions, and constraints', 'Extends Conventional Commits with structured action lines in the commit body' — with only a minor gap (the specific action types are not enumerated). It sits between anchor 3 ('1-2 concrete actions') and anchor 5 ('multiple specific concrete actions; comprehensive coverage'), noticeably above the midpoint.

Completeness

Explicitly answers both what ('Write contextual commits... preserve WHY code was written, not just WHAT changed') and when ('Use when committing code, finishing a task, or when the user asks to commit') with concrete trigger phrases, matching anchor 5 exactly. Not 4 because the 'when' clause is specific and multi-trigger, not merely present.

Trigger Term Quality

'committing code', 'finishing a task', and 'when the user asks to commit' are natural user phrasings with good coverage, but common synonyms like 'commit message(s)' and 'git commit' are absent. Good coverage with a few natural terms missing — anchor 4, not 5.

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

The contextual/action-line niche is clear and distinguishable, but 'Use when committing code... when the user asks to commit' is broad enough to overlap with a generic commit-message or Conventional Commits skill. Mostly distinct with minor overlap risk against closely related skills — anchor 4, not 5 (which requires minimal conflict risk) and not 3 (the WHY-preservation framing is distinctive).