Conciseness

The Commands section is lean, but 'Purpose', 'When to Trigger', and 'When to Skip' restate the frontmatter description almost verbatim (~20 lines of duplication already available in context), and 'Best Practices' bullets like 'Document any new learnings' add little. This matches anchor 3 (mostly efficient but some unnecessary content that could be tightened) rather than anchor 4, since the duplication is a noticeable, removable block rather than a minor trim.

Actionability

Every command is a concrete, executable npx invocation with a copy-paste-ready example ('agent spawn --type coder --name impl-auth', 'task orchestrate --task "refactor auth module" --strategy parallel --max-agents 4'), matching anchor 4. It falls short of anchor 5 because the primary forms use raw placeholders ('--type [type] --name [name]') with no guidance on valid values, and the Scripts/References tables point to paths that don't resolve in the bundle, so that guidance is not actually executable.

Workflow Clarity

Commands are individually well-defined and their presentation roughly implies a lifecycle (Initialize, Route, Spawn, Monitor, Orchestrate), matching anchor 3 (sequence present but implicit, checkpoints missing). There is no explicit step order, no guidance on when to run 'swarm status --verbose' or what to check, and no validation or error-recovery loop for a batch operation that spawns multiple agents — which caps it at 3 and well below anchor 4's 'most checkpoints present'.

Progressive Disclosure

The body is well-sectioned with clear Scripts and References tables (good structure), but scored against the actual bundle the pointers break: the scripts exist at 'scripts/swarm-start.sh' yet the table cites '.agents/scripts/swarm-start.sh', and referenced 'docs/agents.md' and 'docs/topology.md' do not exist in the bundle. This matches anchor 3 (references present and signaled but not reliably navigable) rather than anchor 4, whose 'minor organization gaps' do not cover broken/nonexistent paths.

Specificity

The description names the domain ('Multi-agent swarm coordination') and a couple of concrete mechanisms ('Uses hierarchical topology with specialized agents to break down and execute complex work'), but the actual actions remain generic — 'coordination', 'break down and execute complex work' — with no mention of the concrete operations (init, route, spawn, orchestrate, monitor). It matches anchor 3 (domain plus 1-2 concrete actions, not comprehensive) better than anchor 4, and better than anchor 2 since it does state specific mechanisms rather than purely generic processing.

Completeness

It explicitly answers both: what ('Multi-agent swarm coordination... Uses hierarchical topology with specialized agents to break down and execute complex work') and when ('Use when: 3+ files need changes, ...'), with seven concrete trigger phrases plus a 'Skip when' boundary list. This matches anchor 5 (clearly and explicitly answers both what AND when with concrete trigger phrases); the 'what' is stated first and the 'when' is more specific than anchor 4's example.

Trigger Term Quality

'3+ files need changes, new feature implementation, cross-module refactoring, API changes with tests, security-related changes, performance optimization across codebase, database schema changes' covers natural phrases users would say when they need this skill, plus an explicit skip list. It matches anchor 4 (good coverage, a few natural terms missing) — missing common variations like 'multi-file changes', 'large refactor', or 'test suite' — and falls short of anchor 5's comprehensive synonym/extension coverage.

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

The multi-agent swarm orchestration niche with explicit multi-file/cross-module triggers is mostly distinct, matching anchor 4 (mostly distinct; minor overlap risk). Broad triggers like 'new feature implementation' and 'security-related changes' overlap with general coding and review skills, keeping it below anchor 5, while the explicit 'Skip when' list reduces the overlap risk that would place it at anchor 3.