Conciseness

The body is dense with genuinely non-obvious operational detail (MCP tool names, meta flags, resolution order), but several points are repeated: 'do not refuse when no holder is selected' appears in both step 2 and the Notes, holder deletion by default appears in step 5 and again in step 6, and the size-contract props are restated across steps 3 and 5. It is mostly efficient but could be tightened by deduplicating these.

Actionability

Guidance is highly concrete: exact tool names ('get_cowart_selection', 'insert_cowart_image', 'save_cowart_canvas_state'), exact meta flags, JSON shape specs, an example generation prompt, and asset path patterns. The gap is the output-resolution step — 'inspect the current Codex session JSONL ... extract the PNG/base64 payload' gives no concrete command or jq/Python snippet to execute, leaving that branch at the instruction level.

Workflow Clarity

The 8-step sequence is clearly ordered with well-signaled branching (holder replacement vs standalone) and includes real checkpoints: visual inspection of the resolved bitmap before insertion, and post-save confirmation of shape id, dimensions, aspect ratio, asset path, and replaced holder. A 4 rather than 5 because there is no explicit error-recovery loop (e.g., what to do when the located file is stale or insertion fails) — the resolution order implies one but never states a retry path.

Progressive Disclosure

The body has clear sections (Preconditions, Workflow, Notes) but is a single ~139-line monolith with no bundle files at all. Content that naturally belongs in one-level-deep references — the meta-flag specifications, the legacy geo-holder support, the file-resolution order, and the Codex JSONL extraction details — is inlined, which sits at 'some structure but could be better organized'.

Specificity

The description names concrete actions — 'Generate and place a final AI bitmap', 'replacing a selected AI 图片 holder', 'inserting the image into the current page' — which cover several specific capabilities of the Cowart workflow. Minor gaps remain (e.g., sizing to the holder, asset handling), so it sits at 'several specific actions with minor gaps' rather than comprehensive.

Completeness

The 'what' is clear (generate and place an AI bitmap, replace a holder or insert into the current page), but the 'when' is entirely absent — there is no 'Use when...' clause or equivalent trigger guidance, which caps this dimension at 3 per the judging guidelines.

Trigger Term Quality

Relevant terms like 'AI bitmap', 'Cowart canvas', 'image', 'holder', and 'replace' are present, but common user phrasings and synonyms ('generate an image', 'picture', 'artwork', 'AI-generated image', 'put on the canvas') are missing. The 'AI 图片' label is domain jargon that only existing Cowart users would say, so coverage is partial.

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

The Cowart-specific framing ('Cowart canvas', 'AI 图片 holder') creates a clear niche that mostly avoids conflict with generic image-generation skills. Minor overlap risk remains for generic 'generate an image' requests, since the leading action 'Generate ... AI bitmap' could plausibly match a plain imagegen skill before the Cowart qualifier is reached.