Conciseness

The body is dense and directive with no generic filler (no explaining what UX is to Claude), and soft-skill content is compressed into heuristics. Minor over-length: illustrative anecdotes (lanterna no porão, caso QR Code) and the pipeline positioning repeated across intro, Posicao no Pipeline, Handoff and Integracao could be trimmed. Not 5 because of these trimmable passages; not 3 because padding is minor, not 'some unnecessary explanation'.

Actionability

Concrete, ready-to-use guidance throughout: a method-selection table mapping question type to method, specific recruiting numbers ("teste com 3-5 usuários"), a defined synthesis output ("3 bullet points"), a citability checkpoint ("apontar de qual entrevista/métrica/observação especificamente ela veio — se não conseguir apontar... Reescrever ou remover"), and verified reference files holding actual templates. For an instruction-only skill this fully covers the common cases.

Workflow Clarity

The 6-step Protocolo is clearly sequenced (definir problema → escolher método → conduzir → sintetizar → produzir artefato → gates + handoff) with explicit validation: the step-5 Checkpoint has a fix-and-redo loop ("Reescrever ou remover a afirmação antes de entregar"), step 6 runs integrity/anti-AI gates, and 'Evidencia de Conclusao' is a completion checklist. Feedback loops for error recovery are present.

Progressive Disclosure

The body is a genuine overview: three one-level-deep references, each real on disk, annotated with scope and loaded on demand ("Carregar apenas a referência que o entregável pedido exige"), and sintese-tematica.md itself states when to use it instead of the default step 4. Not 5 because the body references `GLOBAL.md` and five `policies/*.md` paths that are not present in this bundle, leaving dangling navigation targets; not 3 because all in-bundle references are well-signaled and appropriately split.

Specificity

Lists multiple specific concrete actions with comprehensive coverage of the domain: "entrevista com usuário, criação de persona baseada em pesquisa, mapa de jornada (journey map), teste de usabilidade qualitativo, arquitetura de informação, card sorting e validação de problema". Not 4: the capability list covers essentially the full qualitative-research workflow rather than having minor gaps.

Completeness

Explicitly answers both what (the enumerated capability list) and when via the equivalent of a 'Use when' clause: "Trigger em: 'pesquisa com usuário', 'user research', ..." with concrete trigger phrases. Not 4: the 'when' is fully explicit with a concrete trigger list, not merely present-but-imprecise.

Trigger Term Quality

Comprehensive natural terms with synonyms in both Portuguese and English: "pesquisa com usuário", "user research", "UX research", "discovery", "mapa de jornada", "journey map", "teste de usabilidade", "usability testing", "criar persona", "focus group". These are exactly the phrases a user would say when needing this skill; not 4 because synonym coverage is near-exhaustive for the domain.

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

The niche is clear (qualitative UX research) and it explicitly positions itself against adjacent skills ("Antecede o PO (01) e o UI/UX (02)"), but a few triggers like "discovery", "taxonomia" and "arquitetura de informação" overlap with closely related skills in the same suite (ui-ux-design 02, data-analytics 21). Not 5 due to this minor overlap risk; not 3 because the majority of triggers ("entrevista em profundidade", "card sorting", "teste de usabilidade", "focus group") are unambiguous.