Conciseness

Four lean sentences — "This skill has been renamed.", "Invoke the configs-update skill instead", plus the old-reference remediation line — with zero padding and no explanation of concepts Claude already knows. Every token earns its place, matching the 'Lean and efficient' anchor; nothing can be trimmed without losing information.

Actionability

The guidance is fully concrete and executable despite having no code: "Invoke the configs-update skill instead — it contains the current, complete instructions" and "update it from aiconfig-update to configs-update" give exact actions for both the invocation case and the stale-reference case. Per the rubric's scoring note, absence of code in an instruction-only skill is not penalized when the guidance is actionable, so this matches the top anchor.

Workflow Clarity

This is a single-purpose skill (a redirect) with one unambiguous action, and the rubric's simple-skill guideline allows a 5 in that case. It even handles the one edge case explicitly — arriving via an old reference — with a clear remediation step, and the bolded "Do not follow any instructions here" guard prevents the main failure mode of deprecated skills.

Progressive Disclosure

The skill is under 50 lines with no bundle files (no references/, scripts/, or assets/ exist), and the single cross-skill pointer ("Invoke the configs-update skill instead") is clearly signaled rather than buried. Under the rubric's guideline for short, self-contained skills, this matches the 'well-organized, easy navigation' top anchor.

Specificity

Phrases like "this skill was renamed to configs-update" and "invoke configs-update instead" name the domain (deprecation/redirect) and one or two concrete actions, but there is no capability list — the description only tells the reader where to go, not what the skill's function covers. This matches the anchor 'Names domain and 1-2 concrete actions, but not comprehensive'; a 4 would require several specific listed actions, which a redirect stub deliberately omits.

Completeness

The 'what' is explicit and clear: "DEPRECATED redirect — this skill was renamed to configs-update... Kept only so old references to aiconfig-update still point users to the new name." But there is no 'Use when...' clause or equivalent positive trigger guidance — only the negative instruction "Do not use this skill" — so per the judging guideline completeness is capped at 3 ('what' clear, 'when' missing/only weakly implied).

Trigger Term Quality

The natural terms present are the skill names themselves — "aiconfig-update" and "configs-update" — which are exactly what a user or automation would say when hitting this stub. However there are no domain or task keywords at all (nothing about what either skill does), so keyword coverage is incomplete, matching 'Some relevant keywords but missing common variations or synonyms' rather than the 'Good keyword coverage' of a 4.

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

The niche is very clear (a tombstone for one specific old name) and its explicit "invoke configs-update instead" instruction makes wrong-skill triggering unlikely, satisfying 'mostly distinct'. It does not reach 5 because the description itself contains the string "configs-update", so searches for the new skill's name also surface this stub — a minor overlap risk with its closely related replacement.