Conciseness

The body spends no tokens on concepts Claude already knows — every line is household-only fact (endpoints, repo paths, version gotchas like '中文 Google 字体的 loadFont 别传 subsets'、'--scale 0.6667 算出的高度不是整数'), and the 2026-10-14 preamble doubles as a deprecation marker. It sits at anchor 4 rather than 5 because the preamble's backstory ('同一支《AI-native builder 的一天》…看一遍就指出了…') is a few sentences of history that could be tightened to one.

Actionability

Copy-paste-ready commands cover the common cases: 'scripts/tts-check.py --check-ref 参考音.wav "文字"'、'scripts/timeline-check.py timeline.json'、'npm install --include=dev'、'npx remotion add <包名>'、exact local endpoints 'http://127.0.0.1:9879/v1/audio/speech'， and render fixes down to '用 volume + alimiter 调到 -16 LUFS'. MCP usage names exact fields (expectedRevision、assets[].bindingSelection); both referenced scripts exist in the bundle and match their described behavior.

Workflow Clarity

Explicit validation checkpoints and feedback loops are present — tts-check re-listens and auto-re-records '最多三次'， timeline-check runs '渲染前'， '没连续看过就写「没看过」'， and delivery waits for You's explicit '已改／还不对' verdict. Below anchor 5 because there is no single ordered end-to-end sequence: the reader must assemble the order from the topical sections (素材 → 工程 → 交片).

Progressive Disclosure

Structure is good and all references are one level deep and clearly signaled — [视频作品交付](../.cat-cafe-shared-refs/video-work-delivery.md)， cross-skill remotion-best-practices rules/*.md， anime-forge assets/art-brief-header.md — and both scripts referenced in the body exist in scripts/. Held at anchor 4 rather than 5 because scripts/test_video_checks.py is in the bundle but never mentioned in SKILL.md, a minor discoverability gap.

Specificity

Names several concrete capabilities — '工程在哪、本机配音和回听怎么调、…怎么在 Console 里交片' plus an explicit 'Output: Remotion 工程 + Works 中的视频作品与确定版本的交片卡' — with only minor gaps. It falls short of anchor 5 because capabilities are phrased as knowledge topics rather than a comprehensive list of actions; 'You' functions as the household's proper name for the human, not second-person reader address, so no voice penalty applies.

Completeness

Explicitly answers both questions: the 'what' ('家里用 Remotion 做视频要知道的事' plus a concrete Output line) and the 'when' (a literal 'Use when:' clause with concrete trigger phrases like 宣传片、配音、对时间轴、交片). It also adds a 'Not for:' boundary, matching the anchor-5 example's structure; nothing below 5 fits since neither part is missing or weak.

Trigger Term Quality

'Use when: 要做或改一支视频（宣传片、产品界面演示、讲解片、动态排版、录屏剪辑）…配音、对时间轴、交片' gives good natural-term coverage across video types and tasks, clearly above anchor 3's partial coverage. Not anchor 5: a few natural phrases users would say (配乐/BGM、字幕、渲染、剪辑 alone) are missing from the trigger list.

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

A clear household-video niche with explicit disambiguation: 'Not for: 只查某个 Remotion API…（读官方 remotion-best-practices）；…动画短片（用 anime-forge）；PPT（用 ppt-forge）', and it even resolves the hard overlap case ('主角是家里的猫、片里有剧情的产品宣传片' still routes here). Minimal conflict risk; anchors 4 and below describe unresolved overlap that this description does not have.