Conciseness

The body is lean throughout: no concept explanations, every sentence instructs ('Read task.md and report.md in your bus folder', 'Write the Handoff Log per §5.1'), and the one rationale is a single purposeful clause ('Your memory of earlier turns may be out of date, so check the current state'). Matches anchor 5 ('every token earns its place'); not 4 because there is no over-explanation to trim.

Actionability

Concrete, executable guidance throughout: exact paths ('.apm/bus/<agent-slug>/handoff.md', '.apm/memory/handoffs/<agent-slug>/handoff-<NN>.log.md'), two copy-paste-ready markdown templates with frontmatter fields, and three explicit resume branches (mid-Task, mid-batch, between Tasks) covering the common cases. Per the scoring notes, an instruction-only skill needs actionable guidance rather than code; not 4 because there are no material gaps.

Workflow Clarity

Sections 1-4 give a clear sequence (check state → write log → write prompt → user review) with explicit checkpoints: §1 mandates verifying current state before writing either file, and §4 is a literal feedback loop ('Apply their corrections and ask again. After they approve...'). Not a destructive or batch operation so no cap applies; not 4 because validation is explicit rather than implied.

Progressive Disclosure

A well-sectioned single-file procedure (numbered sections, §5 format templates) with one clearly signaled external cross-reference ('{SKILL_PATH:apm-3-initiate-worker} §1.2') and no bundle files. Fits anchor 4 ('Good structure; most content is appropriately placed; minor organization gaps'); not 5 because the ~77-line body exceeds the rubric's under-50-line simple-skill threshold and inlines two full templates that could arguably be split into a reference file.

Specificity

The description names the domain ('Handoff with an APM Worker') but the only action is the generic 'Perform a Handoff' — no concrete sub-actions (e.g., writing a Handoff Log or Handoff Prompt) are stated. This matches anchor 2 ('Names the domain but actions are minimal or generic', like 'Processes PDF files'); not 3 because there are not 1-2 concrete actions beyond the single generic one.

Completeness

Both parts are explicit: what ('Perform a Handoff with an APM Worker') and when ('Use only when the User manually invokes this skill'). Anchor 4 fits because the when is present but the what is thin — it never says what the handoff produces; not 5 because there are no concrete trigger phrases, and not 3 because an explicit 'Use when...' clause is present so the completeness cap does not apply.

Trigger Term Quality

'Handoff' and 'APM Worker' are relevant domain keywords a user of this system would naturally say, but there are no synonyms or variations such as 'context handoff', 'continue in a new chat', or 'pass off work'. Fits anchor 3 ('Some relevant keywords but missing common variations or synonyms'); not 4 because coverage beyond 'Handoff' is absent.

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

'Handoff with an APM Worker' carves a clear niche within the APM system, and 'Use only when the User manually invokes this skill' eliminates accidental triggering by other skills. Matches anchor 5 ('Clear niche with distinct triggers; minimal conflict risk'); not 4 because the manual-only restriction leaves no meaningful overlap risk.