Step 1: Use the classic tetrahedron-volume picture.
Imagine drawing a line from the receiver to each visible satellite and extending these lines to unit length; the tips of these unit vectors define points, and the volume of the solid (tetrahedron, for 4 satellites) they enclose is directly related to DOP: $\text{DOP} \propto 1/\text{Volume}$.
Step 2: Reason about two extreme geometric cases.
Case 1: all visible satellites are clustered near the zenith (nearly parallel line-of-sight vectors). The tetrahedron they form is very thin and flat, so its volume is nearly zero, making $1/\text{Volume}$, and hence DOP, very large (poor precision), even if the receiver's clock and multipath errors are both zero. Case 2: the satellites are spread out uniformly across the whole sky, forming a large, well-shaped tetrahedron with large volume, giving a small DOP (good precision), again regardless of clock or multipath error levels.
Step 3: Note that ranging-error sources are absent from this picture entirely.
Neither clock error nor multipath error enters the volume/tetrahedron construction at all, since it is built purely from geometric directions to the satellites; changing the receiver's clock bias or the amount of multipath at the antenna does not change the shape of this tetrahedron in the least.
Step 4: Note the imperfect link to satellite count.
Adding more satellites can help build a bigger, better-shaped tetrahedron, but it is not guaranteed; four satellites bunched in the sky still give poor (high) DOP despite a nonzero count, while four satellites spread favourably give good (low) DOP with the same count. So DOP tracks the spatial arrangement, not the raw number.
Step 5: Conclude.
DOP is, by construction, a purely geometric quantity describing how favourably the satellites are arranged in the sky as seen from the receiver.
\[ \boxed{\text{DOP} \rightarrow \text{Satellite geometry}} \]