Conciseness

The body is lean and assumes Claude's competence, but the no-fabrication rule is stated three times ('Only surface what the tool returned. Never fabricate...' in Why, the WRONG/RIGHT fabrication example in Anti-patterns, and 'Every observation shown came from the tool response... not invention' in Checklist) — a minor duplication that could be trimmed, matching anchor 4 rather than 5.

Actionability

Fully executable guidance: a copy-paste-ready 'memory_smart_search { "query": ..., "limit": 10 }' call, an expected-output sample, and exact parameters for scoping ('project', 'agentId', 'targetLayer: "memory"/"observation"', 'expandIds' as comma-separated string).

Workflow Clarity

A clear 6-step sequence with explicit validation checkpoints and error recovery: inspect 'matched_count', 'excluded_by_budget', and 'content_truncated' before treating empty results as absent; report failed expansions rather than guessing; and a no-match fallback with suggested alternative terms. A checklist reinforces the process.

Progressive Disclosure

Sections are well organized (Quick start, Why, Workflow, Anti-patterns, Checklist, See also, Troubleshooting) and the reference is clearly signaled and one level deep. However, the body links to TROUBLESHOOTING.md ('See [TROUBLESHOOTING.md](TROUBLESHOOTING.md) if memory_smart_search is not available') and no such file exists in the bundle, leaving a dangling reference — a minor gap that fits anchor 4, not 5.

Specificity

Names the system ('agentmemory'), the searchable artifacts ('past observations, sessions, and learnings'), and the method ('hybrid BM25 plus vector plus graph search'). It is one search action comprehensively described rather than several distinct actions, so it sits at anchor 4 ('lists several specific actions; minor gaps'), not 5.

Completeness

Clearly answers both questions: 'Search agentmemory for past observations, sessions, and learnings about a topic...' (what) and an explicit 'Use when the user says...' clause with concrete trigger phrases (when).

Trigger Term Quality

Quotes natural phrases users actually say — '"recall"', '"what did we do about"', '"did we ever"', '"have we seen"' — plus the scenario 'needs context from past sessions', giving comprehensive synonym-level trigger coverage per the anchor-5 example.

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

The memory-recall niche with these trigger phrases is mostly distinct, but 'did we ever' / 'have we seen' can plausibly overlap with sibling session-history skills the body itself names (recap, session-history), keeping it at anchor 4 rather than 5.