Conciseness

Core content is dense and operational (the signal→auditor grep table, the verbatim DIFF SCOPE block, "Today's date tag for filenames: use ISO format `YYYY-MM-DD`"), but several sections are removable padding: "This makes it unambiguous to the reader (and to any PR reviewer pasting the report into a comment)..." explains rationale Claude doesn't need, the three trivial Invocation Examples ("user: 'Run a health check on my project' / assistant: [Launches health-check agent]") teach nothing, and the closing "## Scope" section restates the opening paragraph. This matches anchor 3 (mostly efficient, some unnecessary explanation that could be tightened) — not 2, since there is no concept-teaching padding, and not 4, because the invocation-examples/Related/Scope sections are noticeable slack rather than minor instances.

Actionability

Every phase carries exact, executable guidance: the glob ("Glob `**/*.swift`"), precise grep patterns ("`Timer.scheduledTimer` or `CLLocationManager`"), concrete output paths ("`scratch/health-check-{area}-{date}.md`"), a copy-paste-ready verbatim scope block ("Only audit the files listed below. Do NOT report findings outside this list..."), exact report formats ("` Scope: changed files vs `<base>` (merge-base `<short-SHA>`, N files) `"), a hard threshold ("If >100 total findings"), and a complete 28-row auditor→skill path mapping. Per the scoring notes for instruction-only skills, this is copy-paste-ready guidance with no meaningful gaps, matching anchor 5.

Workflow Clarity

Phases 0–4 are explicitly sequenced with validation checkpoints and feedback loops throughout: "obtain a verified `DIFF SCOPE` block before auditing; do not fall back to a full audit", "Wait for all selected audits to finish or have a recorded failure before proceeding. A failure or unavailable capability is not a passed audit", error recovery ("If an auditor fails or times out, note it in the report and continue with others"), post-hoc scope verification ("drop any finding whose file path is not in the Phase 0 file list before deduplicating"), and bounded-batch capacity management for delegation. This matches anchor 5 (clear sequence, explicit validation, feedback loops, checklists); anchor 4 falls short because validation here is explicit and repeated, not merely present.

Progressive Disclosure

The body correctly delegates all per-domain procedure detail to one-level-deep sibling skills via a clearly signaled mapping table ("`memory-auditor` → `axiom-audit-memory` (`../axiom-audit-memory/SKILL.md`)"), keeping the orchestrator self-contained. However, no bundle files exist in this skill's directory (no references/, scripts/, assets/), and none of the referenced `../axiom-*` paths resolve on disk, so the references cannot be verified; sections like Invocation Examples and Related are inline filler. This matches anchor 4 (good structure, references mostly clear, minor organization gaps) rather than 5 (references unverifiable, some inline content should move or go), and clearly above 3 (the mapping table is a well-signaled shallow reference pattern).

Specificity

Phrases like "comprehensive project-wide audit", "full health check", and "scan across all domains" name the domain but use only generic activity nouns; the description never states a concrete action (running specialized auditor procedures, deduplicating findings by file:line, producing a unified report). This matches anchor 2 ("Names the domain but actions are minimal or generic") rather than 3, which requires 1-2 concrete actions, and not 1, since it is not pure abstract language.

Completeness

The "when" is explicit ("Use when the user wants a comprehensive project-wide audit..."), but the "what" is only vague — "audit / health check / scan" restates the trigger instead of describing what the skill does. This sits between anchor 2 (vague what, no when — inapplicable since when is present) and anchor 4 (both present — inapplicable since the what is too vague to count), so it lands at 3 by boundary guidance.

Trigger Term Quality

"comprehensive project-wide audit", "full health check", and "scan" are natural phrases users say (matching the body's own invocation examples like "Run a health check on my project"), giving good keyword coverage. It falls short of anchor 5 because common variations such as "audit my codebase", "check my project for issues", or "full project review" are missing, but exceeds anchor 3 since the terms present are exactly what users would naturally say.

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

Qualifiers "project-wide", "full", and "across all domains" clearly distinguish this orchestrator from the 28 single-domain auditor skills in the same family ("Works with PDF and Word document files"-level distinctness). It is not anchor 5 because bare trigger words like "scan" remain somewhat broad and the skill family contains many closely related auditors that a plain "audit my project" request could match instead.