Conciseness

The ~75-line body is dense directive bullets with zero concept explanations — nothing teaches what React, Effector, or routing is; every line issues a library-specific instruction ('Initialize controls with setHistory before expecting route activation', 'Prefer declarative Effector links (sample, attach) over imperative glue code'). This matches the score-5 anchor 'Lean and efficient; assumes Claude's competence; every token earns its place'.

Actionability

Guidance is concrete with exact API call shapes — 'router.registerRoute(...)', 'createRouter({ routes })', 'createRoutesView({ otherwise })', and a near-executable SSR expression 'allSettled(router.setHistory, { params: historyAdapter(createMemoryHistory(...)) })' — and copy-paste scaffolds are delegated to references/examples.md. Per the rubric's instruction-only allowance the missing inline code is not penalized, but most bullets remain directives rather than copy-paste-ready examples, so it sits between the score-4 and score-5 anchors rather than clearly matching the 'fully executable, copy-paste ready' anchor.

Workflow Clarity

The workflow is a clear five-step sequence (classify task → load only required references → resolve source of truth → build in explicit dependency order → output contract), with an explicit validation checkpoint ('End with references/checklist.md before final output') backed by a real 59-line checklist file, plus error-recovery guidance ('If docs and code differ, follow code behavior and note mismatch briefly') and a dedicated 'debug' task category. This matches the score-5 anchor 'Clear sequence with explicit validation steps; feedback loops for error recovery; checklists for complex processes'; routing work is not destructive or batch, so no cap applies.

Progressive Disclosure

The body is a pure orchestrator: it keeps the overview inline and conditionally routes to 11 one-level-deep reference files keyed to task type ('Add references/react-web.md for any React integration task', 'Add references/paths-dsl.md when working with route path syntax'). All 11 referenced files exist in references/ and none nest further references. This matches the score-5 anchor 'Clear overview with well-signaled one-level-deep references; content appropriately split; easy navigation'.

Specificity

The description lists six concrete, named actions — 'creating routes and routers', 'wiring RouterControls/history adapters', 'composing routes with chainRoute/group/createVirtualRoute', 'rendering views with RouterProvider/createRoutesView/Outlet', 'building links with Link/useLink', 'managing URL query state with trackQuery and @argon-router/paths' — covering the library's full surface. This matches the anchor 'Lists multiple specific concrete actions; comprehensive coverage' and exceeds the score-4 anchor, which anticipates gaps in coverage.

Completeness

It explicitly answers both questions: 'what' ('Integrate and use argon-router in React web applications with Effector...') and 'when' ('Use when tasks involve creating routes and routers... managing URL query state with trackQuery and @argon-router/paths'). The explicit 'Use when' clause with concrete trigger phrases matches the score-5 anchor exactly and avoids the completeness cap for missing trigger guidance.

Trigger Term Quality

Good natural-term coverage: 'routes', 'routers', 'links', 'URL query state', 'React web applications', 'Effector', plus the package name '@argon-router/paths'. However, common user phrasings like 'navigation', 'query params', and 'redirects' are absent, so it falls just short of the score-5 anchor's 'comprehensive coverage of natural terms including synonyms'. It clearly exceeds the score-3 anchor, which expects missing common variations, since most terms a user of this library would say are present.

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

It occupies a clear niche — the named library argon-router with Effector — and its triggers are API names unique to that library (chainRoute, RouterProvider, trackQuery), so it would not fire for generic React routing or react-router tasks. This matches the score-5 anchor 'Clear niche with distinct triggers; minimal conflict risk'.