Conciseness

The body avoids concept explanations and is mostly lean, but the 4-line QBIN fallback block is duplicated verbatim in steps 1 and 2, and the step-5 summary template hardcodes filler specifics ("src/export/serializer.rs", "All 12 unit tests passing") that read as padding. This matches "mostly efficient but includes some unnecessary content or could be tightened" rather than the efficient anchor 4.

Actionability

Steps 1, 2, 3, and 5 give concrete, executable bash with real arguments (doctor, team 2:codex,1:opencode with --tasks, team status, team shutdown --graceful), and step 4 names concrete verification commands (npm test, cargo test, pytest). Minor gaps keep it below 5: steps 3-5 reference "$QBIN" without re-establishing it (env vars don't persist across shell invocations, so those blocks aren't self-contained), and the monitoring step gives no polling cadence.

Workflow Clarity

The five steps form a clear sequence (verify pool → launch → monitor → validate → shutdown/handoff) with an explicit validation step ("Run build/test verification commands ... to confirm edits compile and pass tests cleanly") and an explicit error-recovery feedback loop ("If a worker fails or emits errors, inspect worker log pane ... resolve failure, or re-assign subtask"). This matches the anchor requiring explicit validation plus feedback loops; the batch-operation cap does not apply since verification is present.

Progressive Disclosure

The body is well-sectioned and correctly delegates CLI detail to a reference, but scored against the actual bundle the single reference is broken: no references/ directory exists, CLI_REFERENCE.md is absent, and the link target "../../references/CLI_REFERENCE.md" escapes the skill root instead of using the conventional references/CLI_REFERENCE.md path. The promise of "Complete CLI subcommands, flags, and provider pool options" is undeliverable, which is more than the "minor organization gaps" of anchor 4.

Specificity

Quotes like "spawn persistent tmux worker teams across coding-agent CLIs" and "implement features and edit files in parallel" name the domain with 1-2 concrete actions, but "implement features" is generic and lifecycle actions (status, monitoring, shutdown) are absent, so coverage is not comprehensive. Not 4 because several specific actions are not listed; not 2 because the actions given are genuinely concrete rather than minimal or generic.

Completeness

Both parts are explicit: the "what" ("spawn persistent tmux worker teams ... to implement features and edit files in parallel") and the "when" ("Use for team execution via /team"). The "when" clause could be more explicit and specific — it names only the /team command rather than concrete trigger phrases users would naturally say — which matches anchor 4 rather than 5.

Trigger Term Quality

Relevant keywords exist ("team", "tmux", "parallel", "worker", plus provider names Claude/Codex/OpenCode), but the trigger guidance reduces to "Use for team execution via /team" — a slash-command name rather than natural phrases a user would say. Missing common variations like "run tasks in parallel", "multiple agents", "delegate", so it sits at "some relevant keywords but missing common variations" rather than the good-coverage anchor.

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

The niche is distinct (cross-CLI tmux worker teams) and it explicitly carves out the boundary with the sibling skill ("For full lifecycle management, steering, and recovery, see quintet-team-runtime"), showing deliberate disambiguation. Minor overlap risk remains with the closely related quintet-team-runtime skill and generic parallel-execution requests, keeping it below the minimal-conflict anchor 5.