Conciseness

The body is efficient and numbered, with no concept explanations Claude would already know, e.g. 'Confirm you are currently holding the target object ({obj})'. It is not anchor 5 because the in/on phrasing sentence ('The phrasing (in vs on) is determined by the receptacle type...') partially duplicates the preposition rules already in references/action_guide.md, and 'Use the trajectory as a reference' is a vague token that could be trimmed or made explicit.

Actionability

Concrete, executable AlfWorld action strings are provided ('go to {recep}', 'put {obj} in/on {recep}') plus a specific error signal ('Nothing happened') and a pointer to a real reference file. It falls short of anchor 5 because the body includes no concrete worked example (e.g., 'put toiletpaper 1 on toiletpaperhanger 1'), and the example trajectory in the reference file is only surfaced for troubleshooting rather than for the happy path.

Workflow Clarity

The four steps are clearly sequenced with a pre-flight check ('Confirm you are currently holding the target object', 'ensure it is open') and an error-handling branch ('If the environment responds with "Nothing happened"... Consult the references/action_guide.md'). Not anchor 5 because there is no explicit feedback loop (fix per the guide, then retry the put) and no success-confirmation checkpoint; not anchor 3 since checkpoints are more present than missing.

Progressive Disclosure

The ~19-line body is a lean overview with failure-mode detail and preposition rules appropriately split into a real, one-level-deep reference (references/action_guide.md, verified to exist) that is clearly signaled in the error-handling step. It misses anchor 5 because step 3's preposition guidance says 'Use the trajectory as a reference' instead of pointing to the preposition table in action_guide.md, leaving the reference only partially surfaced where it is most relevant.

Specificity

The description names concrete actions and their parameters ('Places a held object onto or into a target receptacle', 'performing a "put" action', 'takes the object and destination receptacle as inputs'), listing the operation in several concrete forms (deposit, install on holder, store in container). It falls short of anchor 5 because it does not comprehensively enumerate the action's variants (e.g., the in/on preposition choice), but exceeds anchor 3's '1-2 concrete actions' since the single-action scope is fully characterized.

Completeness

Both questions are explicitly answered: what ('Places a held object onto or into a target receptacle... performing a "put" action') and when ('Trigger this skill when the agent is carrying an object and needs to deposit it at a specific location to complete a task'). The when-clause includes concrete trigger phrases and situational examples, matching the anchor 5 example structure; anchor 4's caveat that 'when could be more explicit' does not apply.

Trigger Term Quality

Natural trigger phrases like 'carrying an object', 'needs to deposit it', 'installing an item on a holder', and 'storing it in a container' give good keyword coverage with multiple action synonyms (place, put, deposit, store, install). Not anchor 5 because common variations such as 'put down', 'set down', or specific receptacle names that a task might mention are absent.

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

The carrying-a-held-object precondition ('when the agent is carrying an object') carves out a clear niche that distinguishes it from pickup, navigation, or object-finding skills, with distinct trigger language around depositing held objects. Conflict risk with related skills is minimal, matching anchor 5 rather than anchor 4's 'minor overlap risk with closely related skills'.