Conciseness

The body is command-driven and dense (flag table, anti-patterns table) with little concept re-explanation, but flags and exclusion patterns are repeated across Steps 3-5 and the intro restates README facts ("Per the [Lizard README], no external deps required"). Not 5: a few tokens could be trimmed without losing information; not 3: padding is minor.

Actionability

Every step is executable copy-paste shell: "pip install lizard", "lizard src/ -x\"./tests/*\" -C 10 -L 100 -a 5", CSV/XML/HTML output variants, an exit-code CI gate, and per-language "-l" filters with correct lizard syntax. Not 4: the commands cover the common cases completely, including the CI-failure handling path.

Workflow Clarity

Six steps are clearly sequenced (install, baseline, thresholds, CI output, fail gate, per-language scope) with an explicit exit-code checkpoint in Step 5 ("Lizard exits non-zero when any function exceeds the configured threshold"). Not 5: there is no explicit feedback loop for verifying scan scope or interpreting warnings before blocking PRs (e.g., re-running on the diff only is mentioned only as an anti-pattern fix).

Progressive Disclosure

No bundle files exist; the ~120-line body is tightly sectioned (When to use, Steps 1-6, Anti-patterns, Limitations, References) with nothing inlined that belongs in a separate file, and the single external reference is one level deep and clearly signaled in a References section. Not 4: organization is clean throughout with no gaps; the anti-patterns and limitations content is compact enough to warrant inline placement.

Specificity

"enforce per-function cyclomatic complexity, length and parameter-count thresholds, excluding tests" names multiple concrete actions covering the tool's full capability surface (three metrics plus production-only scoping). Not 4: there is no meaningful coverage gap in the actions described.

Completeness

An explicit "Use when a multi-language codebase needs one complexity gate, or a function has grown unreviewable and CI needs a number" trigger clause pairs with a clear third-person what-statement ("Runs Lizard ... to enforce per-function ... thresholds, excluding tests"). Not 4: both what and when are concrete and fully explicit.

Trigger Term Quality

Phrases like "complexity gate", "a function has grown unreviewable", "CI needs a number", and "cyclomatic complexity" are terms users would naturally say. Not 5: common variations such as "CCN", "too many parameters", or "code metrics" are absent.

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

"Lizard", "complexity gate", and "cyclomatic complexity" establish a clear niche distinct from general linters or cognitive-complexity tools. Not 4: overlap risk with related skills is minimal because the tool and metric are named directly.