Conciseness

Two tight paragraphs with zero re-teaching of known concepts and no padding ("This old name forwards to agently-agentic-design. Read the installed replacement's entry..."). It is not 5 because a few governance lines ("No scheduled retirement task is required", "Preserve historical evidence") could be trimmed or merged; not 3 because there is no unnecessary explanation.

Actionability

Concrete, executable guidance for an instruction-only skill: an explicit path (../agently-agentic-design/SKILL.md), unambiguous directives, and a conditional failure branch ("If the replacement is absent, report the installation gap and install it only within the user's authorization; do not claim its guidance was loaded"). It is not 5 because "check active references... update current callers" lacks a concrete method; not 3 because the guidance is specific and executable, not high-level hints.

Workflow Clarity

As a simple single-purpose skill the primary action is unambiguous (read the replacement's entry and continue there), with an explicit error branch for the missing-replacement case. The one destructive operation (removing this forwarding entry) is properly gated by validation: "remove this forwarding entry when migration is verified" and "do not... treat elapsed time as proof of a safe migration", so the missing-validation cap does not apply.

Progressive Disclosure

Under 50 lines with no bundle files (references/, scripts/, assets/ are absent) and no need for external references beyond a single clearly signaled, one-level-deep pointer to the replacement skill's entry. The content is appropriately minimal for a forwarder and well organized, matching the simple-skill exception for a top score.

Specificity

"Continue Agentic system design with agently-agentic-design; human product, interface and document design uses agently-product-design" lists several concrete routing actions with exact replacement skill names. It is not 5 because coverage has minor gaps (e.g., no mention of absent-replacement handling, which only appears in the body), and not 3 because it goes beyond 1-2 generic actions with named targets for multiple domains.

Completeness

The what is clear ("Deprecated compatibility entry" routing to two named replacements) and the when is explicit ("for callers that explicitly name the former agently-design skill"), so the missing-'Use when' cap at 3 does not apply. It is not 5 because the when clause is a single condition without multiple concrete trigger phrasings, and not 3 because trigger guidance is explicit rather than merely implied.

Trigger Term Quality

Relevant keywords are present ("agently-design", "Agentic system design", "product, interface and document design") but common variations users would naturally say ("agentic design", "agent design", "UI design", "design skill") are missing. This matches the 'some relevant keywords but missing common variations or synonyms' anchor rather than 4, where only a few natural terms would be missing.

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

The entry is scoped narrowly to explicit mentions of the old name and actively disambiguates against both replacements, so it is mostly distinct. It is not 5 because it embeds the sibling skills' domain phrases ("Agentic system design", "human product, interface and document design"), creating minor overlap risk with the very skills it forwards to; not 3 because it is far more specific than a broadly overlapping description.