Conciseness

The body is two lines — a maintenance comment and one redirect instruction — with zero padding and no explanation of concepts Claude already knows, so every token earns its place; even the anchor 4 example retains trimmable over-explanation that is absent here.

Actionability

The only concrete guidance is a single instruction to "Load and follow the shared skill at `~/.agents/skills/paseo-committee/SKILL.md`" — a specific path, so above anchor 1's pure abstraction — but every executable step for the actual task is delegated elsewhere, and the referenced path is an absolute external location that is not part of the skill bundle (and does not resolve in this environment), matching anchor 2's minimal guidance missing the specific steps.

Workflow Clarity

The description implies a multi-step process (form a committee, run root cause analysis, produce a plan) but the body contains no sequence, no steps, and no validation whatsoever — "Load and follow" is not a workflow — matching anchor 1's "steps missing or incoherent; no sequence".

Progressive Disclosure

No bundle files exist (no references/, scripts/, or assets/ directories) and the single reference points to an absolute path outside the skill directory rather than a bundle-relative file, so the skill is a bare redirect with no overview content of its own; it avoids anchor 1 (no wall of text or multi-level nesting) but the buried external reference and absent structure match anchor 2 better than anchor 3's "some structure".

Specificity

The description lists several concrete actions — "Form a committee of two high-reasoning agents", "do root cause analysis", and "produce a plan" — which goes beyond the 1-2 actions of anchor 3, but mechanics like how the committee operates or what the plan contains are unspecified, so it falls short of anchor 5's comprehensive coverage.

Completeness

It explicitly answers both questions: the "what" (form a committee, do root cause analysis, produce a plan) and the "when" via a concrete "Use when stuck, looping, tunnel-visioning, or facing a hard planning problem" clause, matching the anchor 5 pattern of explicit what-and-when with concrete trigger phrases.

Trigger Term Quality

Triggers "stuck", "looping", "tunnel-visioning", and "hard planning problem" are phrases a user would naturally say, giving good keyword coverage, but common variations like "spinning", "going in circles", "rabbit hole", or "overthinking" are missing, so it does not reach anchor 5's comprehensive synonym coverage.

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

The committee-of-two-agents framing combined with root-cause analysis when stuck is a fairly distinct niche, but the "hard planning problem" trigger could overlap with generic planning or brainstorming skills, leaving minor conflict risk rather than anchor 5's minimal risk.