Conciseness

The body avoids explaining concepts Claude already knows, but the same routing decision is encoded four times: the Quick Reference table, the dot-graph decision tree, the numbered Decision Tree list, and Example Invocations all repeat 'VoiceOver/Dynamic Type/contrast → skills/accessibility-diag.md'. Mostly efficient signal with substantial tightening opportunity (the dot graph and many example invocations add no new routing), matching anchor 3 rather than 2 since there is no padded prose or over-explanation.

Actionability

As an instruction/router skill the guidance is concrete and specific: unambiguous directives ('See skills/accessibility-diag.md', 'axiom-audit-accessibility') and named APIs ('Image(decorative:)', 'accessibilityInputLabels()', 'accessibilityDifferentiateWithoutColor'). Not 5 because no complete executable code or commands are given — the Critical Patterns bullets name APIs without usage examples.

Workflow Clarity

The classification workflow (symptom → reference file / auditor) is a clear, unambiguous single-action process, well suited to a router skill. Not 5 because there is a routing incoherence: the inline Codex note says 'no Claude Code agent required' yet the decision tree and item 7 route to an 'accessibility-auditor' agent, leaving two conflicting directives for the same intent.

Progressive Disclosure

The body is a proper overview with well-signaled, one-level-deep references ('skills/accessibility-diag.md', 'skills/ux-flow-audit.md', 'skills/watchos-a11y.md') and organized sections, matching anchor 4's good structure. Not 5 because none of the referenced files exist in the skill's bundle (no references/, scripts/, or assets/ directories are present), so the signaled navigation cannot be followed — a structural gap beyond 'minor organization issues' implied by anchor 4 but far better organized than anchor 3.

Specificity

Names the domain and enumerates six concrete sub-areas ('VoiceOver, Dynamic Type, color contrast, touch targets, WCAG compliance, App Store accessibility review'), but the actions themselves are limited to two generic verbs ('fixing or auditing'). Fits anchor 4 (several specific items, minor gaps) rather than 3 (only 1-2 concrete actions) because the enumerated issue types are specific, and not 5 because coverage omits areas the body handles (watchOS, UX dead ends).

Completeness

The 'when' is explicit and specific ('Use when fixing or auditing ANY accessibility issue — VoiceOver...'), and a 'what' is present but terse — 'fixing or auditing' implies the action without stating what the skill concretely does (routing to diagnostic references or audit agents). Both present with one weakly explicit, matching anchor 4 rather than 5.

Trigger Term Quality

Includes natural developer phrases users would actually say ('VoiceOver', 'Dynamic Type', 'color contrast', 'touch targets', 'WCAG compliance'), matching anchor 4's good keyword coverage. Not 5 because common synonyms are missing ('screen reader', 'a11y', 'Section 508', 'reduce motion', 'keyboard navigation').

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

A clear accessibility niche with distinct triggers (VoiceOver, Dynamic Type, touch targets), mostly distinct from sibling skills. Not 5 because 'ANY accessibility issue' plus 'WCAG compliance' and 'color contrast' could overlap with web-accessibility or design/theming skills; more specific than anchor 3's 'could still overlap with similar skills'.