Conciseness

The body is lean and factual throughout ('Real network support: yes. Scripted no-key transport support: yes.') with no explanation of concepts Claude already knows, but a few dense passages could be tightened, notably the 24.x/25.0.0 contextMap format history and version-migration detail, which keeps it below anchor 5.

Actionability

Concrete guidance is present: an executable core-pattern snippet ('auto helper = axllm::agent("question:string -> answer:string")'), named API surface, real example file paths, and specific guardrails. However, the single snippet omits surrounding setup (e.g., how `llm` is constructed) and much of the body describes runtime behavior rather than instructing, so it is not fully copy-paste ready across common cases.

Workflow Clarity

No sequenced steps or validation checkpoints appear anywhere in the body; the intended flow (consult package examples, then wire catalogs/observers, then export state) is only implicit in prose and guardrails. This fits anchor 3 better than anchor 4 (no checkpoints present) and better than anchor 2 (the content is coherent with clear directional guidance, not a rough gap-filled sequence).

Progressive Disclosure

Sections are well organized and package-file references ('API.md', 'axir-capabilities.json', 'examples/') are clearly signaled one level deep, but no bundle files exist and all content is inlined in a single ~59-line file, where lifecycle minutiae and the API-surface list could arguably be split into reference files — a minor organization gap versus anchor 5.

Specificity

Lists five concrete capability areas ('agent memory, recall callbacks, dynamic skill discovery, loaded-skill state, and used-skill tracking') alongside the domain (C++, axllm), but these are feature-area nouns rather than the verb-led concrete actions of the top anchor; it exceeds the 1-2 concrete items of anchor 3.

Completeness

The 'when' is explicit and specific ('Use when writing C++ code with `axllm` for...'), but the 'what' is only implied by the feature list rather than explicitly stated as an action, matching anchor 4 rather than anchor 5; it is clearly above anchor 3 because the trigger guidance is explicit, not weakly implied.

Trigger Term Quality

Natural domain terms users would say are present ('C++ code', 'axllm', 'agent memory', 'skill discovery'), giving good keyword coverage, though common variations like 'memories', 'skill catalog', or 'recall' are missing, so it falls short of the comprehensive synonym coverage of anchor 5.

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

The description names a specific package ('axllm'), the language (C++), and a niche feature set (memory/skill lifecycle for RLM agents), creating a clear niche with distinct triggers and minimal conflict risk with other skills.