Conciseness

The body is lean and directive throughout — commands like `flow_lint.py <ws>`, `flow_board.py <ws>`, `flow_next.py <ws>`, exact fields (`step`, `step_entered`, `holder`, `evidence_exits_met`), and exact report strings (`CYCLE-COMPLETE <rule> <slug>`). It never explains concepts Claude already knows; even the rhetorical one-liners ('a recorded "we could not" beats an invented "we did"') encode behavioral rules rather than padding. Not score 4 because there is no over-explanation to trim — every sentence changes what the agent does.

Actionability

Fully executable for an instruction-only skill: concrete commands with exit-code semantics ('Exit code 4 means the top move is a human decision'), exact file destinations (`reviews/loop-log.md`, `improvements/`, `learnings/`), exact fields to update, and explicit handling of the common cases (lint failure, wrong card, no declared verification, blocked item, over-WIP). Per the scoring notes, absence of code is not penalized when guidance is this actionable. Not score 4 because there are no missing key details the body itself owes — the contract-specific details are correctly delegated to the run card.

Workflow Clarity

The 9-step workflow has an explicit validation gate ('GATE: violations mean... fixing them is this cycle's move, and nothing else is'), an independent verification step with a skeptic's brief, error-recovery paths (escalation, back-edge, DECISION-PENDING), a re-projection step ('Re-run `flow_board.py` (it appends the transition)'), and a closing Quality Gates checklist. Not score 4 because validation checkpoints are explicit at every risky point, not implicit.

Progressive Disclosure

The References section is clearly signaled and one level deep, with a one-line purpose per file ('the six beats and why the leverage table is ordered the way it is'). However, the referenced paths (`skills/flow-driven/references/loop-engineering.md`, `step-contracts.md`, `workflow-definition.md`) are repo-root-relative and the bundle contains no `references/` directory, so the targets cannot be verified as real files and would not resolve if the skill were installed alone. Not score 5 because a well-signaled reference section only earns the top anchor when the referenced files are actually part of the bundle; not score 3 because the SKILL.md itself is a proper overview with nothing inlined that belongs in a separate file.

Specificity

The description enumerates the full concrete action chain — 'validate the definition, regenerate the board, take the single highest-leverage move from the deterministic run card..., run that step under its contract, verify the exit evidence with something independent, and record the transition' — and even itemizes the rule types (overdue decision, broken contract, blocked item, missing exit evidence, ready-to-pull, over-WIP, aging, intake). Not score 4 because coverage is comprehensive with no gaps in the run-cycle action set.

Completeness

Both halves are explicit: the 'what' is the detailed action chain (validate → project → select → run → verify → record), and the 'when' is a literal 'Use to run a cycle, work the flow on a cadence, drive an item to its next decision, or operate the loop headlessly.' Not score 4 because the when-clause is explicit, multi-trigger, and concrete — exactly the anchor-5 pattern of stating what and when with concrete trigger phrases.

Trigger Term Quality

Good natural phrasing a user of this system would say: 'Use to run a cycle, work the flow on a cadence, drive an item to its next decision, or operate the loop headlessly.' Not score 5 because several heavy-jargon terms ('deterministic run card', 'exit evidence', 'over-WIP') dominate and a few natural synonyms ('advance the flow', 'do a flow step') are absent; not score 3 because the explicit use-clause supplies four distinct natural trigger phrases rather than a single keyword.

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

The niche is clear ('Advance a flow workspace agentically', 'flow-driven family') and the use-clause triggers on run-cycle operation rather than authoring or evolving, which separates it from siblings like flow-driven-evolve. Not score 5 because it self-identifies as 'Loop 1 of the flow-driven family' — closely related sibling skills share the 'flow'/'loop' trigger surface, leaving minor overlap risk; not score 3 because the run-vs-evolve distinction is drawn by the triggers themselves.