Conciseness

The body is short and lean ("Performs no operations of its own; it uses the operations of manage-experiments' Create experiment flow"), but routing guidance ("Route to manage-experiments" / "review-experiment-results") is duplicated across the Examples and Troubleshooting sections, and Performance Notes restates what Tools already establishes. Not 3 because there is no concept-teaching padding at all; not 5 because those duplications could be trimmed.

Actionability

Concrete, executable guidance: exact file to read ("Read manage-experiments/SKILL.md"), exact sections and steps ("Phase 1: Establish scope" and "Create experiment section (Steps 1-8)"), exact return fields ("id, status, and the verified fields"), plus a fallback path for tool interfaces that cannot follow markdown links. Not 5 because all executable detail (payload construction, verification steps) lives in the delegated file, so this body alone cannot execute the task; not 3 because the delegation instructions are specific and complete rather than pseudocode-level.

Workflow Clarity

A clear two-step sequence with an explicit validation gate ("Once manage-experiments' Step 8 (Verify) completes, report the created experiment's id, status, and the verified fields... Don't add a second verification pass") and error-recovery feedback ("404 on parent, 409 duplicate name → Report the error as manage-experiments' Troubleshooting table describes; don't retry with invented values"). Matches the anchor-5 pattern of explicit validation with failure handling; 4 would understate the explicit verify gate.

Progressive Disclosure

Well-organized sections with one-level-deep, clearly signaled references ([manage-experiments/SKILL.md](../manage-experiments/SKILL.md) and [tool-map.md](../../../references/fme/tool-map.md)), including a plain fallback path ("read skills/fme/manage-experiments/SKILL.md directly"), and nothing that belongs in a separate file is inlined. Matches the anchor-5 pattern of a clear overview with well-signaled references; 4 would require buried or unclear references.

Specificity

"Invokes manage-experiments' Create experiment flow directly" and "returns the created experiment id plus verification" name concrete actions, with an explicit enumeration of the covered inputs ("same scope, parent/environment resolution, hypothesis, metrics, treatments, window, and rule"). Not 3 because the coverage of the creation payload is comprehensive rather than partial; not 5 because the skill's own action set is narrow (delegate and return) rather than multiple specific operations.

Completeness

Both what ("Thin compatibility entrypoint... Invokes manage-experiments' Create experiment flow... returns the created experiment id plus verification") and when ("Use when asked to create an experiment, set up an A/B test, or design a new experiment") are explicitly and concretely stated, matching the anchor-5 structure exactly. A 4 would require the 'when' to be less explicit than it is here.

Trigger Term Quality

"Trigger phrases: create experiment, set up an A/B test, design an experiment, launch a test, new experiment for X" gives good natural-phrase coverage users would actually say. Not 3 because multiple natural phrasings and synonyms (A/B test, launch, design) are present; not 5 because a few common variations (e.g., "start a test", "A/B testing") are missing.

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

"Do NOT use for updating, pausing, resuming, completing, archiving, or deleting an experiment (manage-experiments), or for explaining results (review-experiment-results)" carves out a clear creation-only niche with named sibling skills and explicit two-way routing. Not 4 because both positive and negative triggers leave minimal conflict risk.