Conciseness

The body is lean and mostly assumes competence — a numbered 6-step workflow, a compact worked example with action→observation pairs, and short decision-point bullets, with no padding explaining known concepts. Not anchor 5 because of hedged filler such as 'you may need to remove them (context-dependent). The default action is to close it and proceed, as some environments abstract this step', which is both verbose and ambiguous. Well above anchor 3, which requires noticeable unnecessary explanation.

Actionability

Largely executable: exact action syntax 'heat {object} with {appliance}' and a complete copy-paste-ready example ('go to fridge 1' → 'take egg 1 from fridge 1' → 'heat egg 1 with microwave 1' → 'put egg 1 in/on diningtable 1') with expected observations. Falls short of anchor 5 because the bundled script is referenced ('Use the bundled `validate_and_plan.py` script to check for common preconditions before starting') with no invocation syntax or arguments, and the script file does not actually exist in the bundle. Clearly above anchor 3, which requires pseudocode or missing key details.

Workflow Clarity

The Core Workflow is a clear, correctly sequenced 6-step procedure (navigate → acquire → navigate to appliance → prepare → heat → place), with decision points for occupied appliances, missing objects, and unavailable appliances. Not anchor 5 because explicit validation checkpoints are thin: the example's observations are shown but no recovery loop is specified (e.g., what to do on 'Nothing happened.' — that guidance lives only in the reference file), and the referenced validate_and_plan.py precondition check has no usage details and is absent from the bundle. This is not a destructive or batch operation, so the ≤3 cap does not apply.

Progressive Disclosure

Sections are well organized and a 'Bundled Resources' section signals the reference file, which exists ('references/common_heating_appliances.md'). However, the other referenced path, 'scripts/validate_and_plan.py', does not exist in the bundle — a broken, unnavigable reference — and the body's 'Key Decision Points' (occupied appliance, alternative appliances) duplicates content already in the reference file rather than deferring to it. Anchor 4 requires references to be mostly clear with only minor organization gaps; a dangling reference plus inline duplication of reference content fits anchor 3 ('could be better organized') better.

Specificity

Concrete actions and interface are explicit — 'Uses a heating appliance (microwave, stoveburner, oven) to apply heat to a specified object' and 'Takes the object name and appliance name as input and outputs the object in a heated state, ready for placement at the task's target location' — naming specific appliances and precise inputs/outputs. It stops short of anchor 5 because it describes essentially one capability (apply heat) rather than multiple distinct actions; the navigate/acquire/place steps live only in the body. Not anchor 3, since the what and how are far more concrete than 'Processes PDF files and extracts content'.

Completeness

Both what ('Uses a heating appliance… to apply heat to a specified object… outputs the object in a heated state, ready for placement at the task's target location') and when ('Use when the task requires warming or cooking an item… and a heating appliance is available') are explicitly and clearly answered with concrete trigger phrases, matching the anchor-5 good example pattern. No missing 'Use when' cap applies.

Trigger Term Quality

Natural trigger coverage is comprehensive with synonyms and concrete example phrases users would say: 'Use when the task requires warming or cooking an item (e.g., "heat some egg", "warm the mug")', covering heat/warm/cook variants. Matches anchor 5's standard of natural terms including synonyms (file extensions are inapplicable in this domain).

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

Clear niche with distinct triggers — heating an object with a named kitchen appliance (microwave, stoveburner, oven) — and 'heat/warm' triggers are well separated from sibling skills like cooling with a fridge. Falls short of anchor 5 because 'cooking an item' creates minor overlap risk with broader food-preparation skills; above anchor 3 since the appliance-scoped heating niche is much more specific than 'Works with document files'.