Conciseness

The body is almost purely operational instruction with no explanation of concepts Claude already knows — no filler, only file paths, dispatch rules, and error handling. Minor tightening is possible (the <background_information> success criteria partially duplicate Steps 3–4, and the display templates are illustrative), matching anchor 4 rather than the fully lean anchor 5.

Actionability

Guidance is fully concrete and copy-paste ready: exact paths ({{KIRO_DIR}}/specs/<feature>/brief.md), a complete verbatim sub-agent task block with exact arguments ("{feature-name} -y"), exact error/report messages, and specific fallback commands ("Run $kiro-spec-quick <feature> --auto"). This matches anchor 5's 'fully executable; specific examples cover the common cases'.

Workflow Clarity

Five clearly sequenced steps with explicit validation checkpoints throughout: Step 1 halts on missing briefs with an exact message; Step 3 verifies the four files per feature after each wave and handles per-feature failure without aborting the wave; Step 4 is a true feedback loop (cross-spec review → fix sub-agents → re-run, 'max 3 remediation rounds'); Step 5 re-verifies and updates the roadmap. As a batch operation it does include validation and feedback loops, so the batch cap does not apply — anchor 5 fits.

Progressive Disclosure

No bundle files exist, and the skill deliberately delegates phase detail to one-level-deep, clearly signaled per-phase skills (.agents/skills/kiro-spec-init/SKILL.md, kiro-spec-requirements, kiro-spec-design, kiro-spec-tasks) instead of inlining them, keeping controller context lightweight. Anchor 4 fits because the ~165-line body is well-sectioned but the verbatim sub-agent task block is inline detail that could partly live in a reference; not 5 since some reorganization remains.

Specificity

"Create complete specs (requirements, design, tasks) for all features in roadmap.md using parallel sub-agent dispatch by dependency wave" enumerates several concrete deliverables (requirements, design, tasks files) and a concrete dispatch mechanism, matching anchor 4's 'several specific actions; minor gaps'. It falls short of anchor 5 because it is essentially one create-verb with enumerated outputs rather than multiple distinct actions.

Completeness

The 'what' is clear and concrete (create complete spec files for all roadmap features), but there is no 'Use when...' clause or equivalent explicit trigger guidance, which per the judging guidelines caps completeness at 3. It is above anchor 2 because the 'what' is specific rather than vague.

Trigger Term Quality

Terms like "specs", "requirements", "design", "tasks", "roadmap.md", and "dependency wave" are domain-relevant, but common natural variations users would say are missing ("specifications", "generate", "batch", "spec out the roadmap"), matching anchor 3 rather than anchor 4's 'a few natural terms missing'.

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

"roadmap.md", "specs (requirements, design, tasks)", and "dependency wave" carve a distinct batch-spec niche with minimal conflict risk; only minor overlap with single-feature spec-creation skills keeps it at anchor 4 rather than 5.