Conciseness

The body is dense and directive, assuming Claude's competence without explaining known concepts, but the 'Artifact Root' prose and the adjacent ce-docs-root comment block overlap, leaving minor trimmable redundancy.

Actionability

Concrete commands and paths appear throughout ('git rev-parse --show-toplevel', 'evaluate with scripts/decide.mjs', 'Read references/spec.md'), but the bulk of executable detail is delegated to referenced files rather than fully inlined.

Workflow Clarity

Four phases are explicitly sequenced with checkpoint markers CP-0 through CP-5, named gates (clean-tree, user approval, dependency pre-approval), enumerated stop criteria, and a measure/write/verify validation discipline with feedback loops.

Progressive Disclosure

The body is a clear overview with well-signaled, one-level-deep references (persistence.md, spec.md, measurement.md, loop.md, wrap-up.md) and named scripts, all verified to exist; content is appropriately split for easy navigation.

Specificity

Names the domain and several concrete actions ('attribute a workload's cost, or score variants and keep winners') rather than vague language, though the actions stay somewhat abstract compared to a fully comprehensive listing.

Completeness

It explicitly answers both what ('Optimize a named target with a measured loop…') and when ('Use when a working system's metric should move and the winning change is not already known') with concrete trigger phrases.

Trigger Term Quality

'Optimize' and 'metric should move' are natural terms a user would say, giving good keyword coverage, but common synonyms (e.g. 'tune', 'benchmark', 'make this faster') are absent.

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

Explicit routing to sibling skills ('Use ce-debug when the job is diagnosis; use ce-work when the change is already known') carves out a clear niche with minimal conflict risk.