Conciseness

The body is dense and procedural with tables, bare commands, and no explanation of concepts Claude already knows, but the self-fix iteration cap is stated three times (Step 3 Caso C, 'Cap absoluto: 2 self-fix iter por ticket', and the Anti-patterns list) and the self-fix policy is split across two sections. This is efficient content with minor redundancy that could be trimmed — the 4 anchor, not the lean-every-token-counts 5.

Actionability

Fully executable, copy-paste-ready guidance: concrete bootstrap commands (git log, git diff HEAD~1 HEAD --stat), self-fix commands (ruff format, ruff check --fix, git add/commit/push), YAML ticket-state update snippets, and complete Agent spawn templates with prompts. Specific examples cover the common audit cases, matching the 5 anchor rather than the minor-gaps 4.

Workflow Clarity

Steps 1-5 are clearly sequenced with explicit validation and feedback loops throughout: verdict processing split into four cases with iteration caps and escalation, a self-fix loop ('Re-correr quality gates → Si verde → APPROVED / Si falla → CHANGES_REQUESTED'), a dev fix → push → re-audit loop, and mandatory end-to-end verification before merge, plus an anti-patterns checklist. This matches the 5 anchor's explicit validation steps with error-recovery feedback loops.

Progressive Disclosure

A well-sectioned single file with clear headers, no nested references, and detail appropriately delegated to sub-agent definitions. It falls short of the 5 anchor because the sub-auditor category catalogs ('11 categorías DDD/tenant/migrations/etc', '13 gates /test-backend') are only gestured at without pointing to where they are defined, and the 'Self-fix policy detallada' section is placed after Step 5 rather than near the Step 3 case it governs — minor organization gaps matching the 4 anchor.

Specificity

The description lists multiple concrete actions covering the full workflow: reads T-{n}-result.md, runs tests itself ('corre tests él mismo'), spawns auditor-{be,fe,agentic} sub-agents by surface, issues a three-valued verdict (APPROVED | CHANGES_REQUESTED | ESCALATED), applies self-fix with a 2-iteration cap, and writes REVIEW-final.md. Coverage is comprehensive rather than leaving minor gaps, so it matches the 5 anchor, not the 4.

Completeness

Both questions are explicitly answered: a clear 'what' (independent audit, running tests itself, spawning sub-auditors by surface, verdict types, self-fix cap, REVIEW-final.md output) and an explicit 'when' with concrete trigger phrases ('Activa cuando user dice...'). This matches the 5 anchor; the 4 anchor requires a weaker or less explicit 'when', which does not apply here.

Trigger Term Quality

'Activa cuando user dice: "/auditor", "auditá T-N", "revisá ticket", "verdict"' gives good natural trigger phrases including the slash command and imperative verb forms. Missing common synonyms and variations (e.g. 'revisar', 'auditoría', 'audit', 'review ticket'), so it fits the 4 anchor rather than comprehensive 5 coverage.

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

Clear niche as an independent ticket auditor with distinct artifact-specific triggers (T-{n}-result.md, '/auditor', 'auditá T-N') and explicit separation from dev-side work ('NO se fía del dev'). Minimal overlap risk with other skills, matching the 5 anchor.