Conciseness

Every clause encodes a non-obvious operational fact, exact command, or failure mode (e.g. "A run started with `tessl launch skill` belongs to no Loop, so Tessl refuses its findings"), and nothing explains concepts Claude already knows. Repeating "ask before each write" across Invariants and step 3 is deliberate safety reinforcement, not padding.

Actionability

Copy-paste-ready commands with placeholders cover every case: `tessl doctor --automations`, `tessl code repo update <owner/repo> --org <org> --review-trigger every-push|open-and-command`, `gh api users/<login> --jq .id`, `tessl schedule trigger <loop id>`. The two deferred spots (web-app key addition, customize.md for skill edits) are constrained by reality and still state the decision rule and follow-up check.

Workflow Clarity

Clear read -> change -> check-and-publish sequence with explicit validation checkpoints at each risky step: doctor before push, cloud check before merge when the hook changed, `view` command after a setting, and Loops confirmation after merge with a recovery path ("if it still is after 10 minutes, tell the person... and do not say it is stopped"). Ask-before-write gates and the what-it-costs/how-to-undo report close the loop.

Progressive Disclosure

The bulky feature catalog is properly split into the real references/features.md, and a dedicated section ("The references you build on") lists every cross-skill reference with what it holds (starters, triggers, setup hook, cloud check, confirm-loops, customize). All references are one level deep, clearly signaled, and the body keeps only the overview, invariants, and the change procedure itself.

Specificity

Names the domain ("Change or extend a Tessl factory that is already set up on this repository") plus multiple concrete capabilities: "let a teammate start runs", "change the model an automation uses", "change how Code Review behaves", "stop or remove an automation", "update the setup hook", "change what the cloud environment can access", "add another automation", "set up Improve development". Coverage is comprehensive, matching the body's full case list rather than anchor 4's 'minor gaps'.

Completeness

Explicitly answers both parts: what ("Change or extend a Tessl factory... and suggest what to add next") and when ("Use when someone wants to..." followed by concrete trigger phrases). This matches anchor 5 exactly; the 'Use when' clause is present so no cap applies.

Trigger Term Quality

Natural user phrasings are well covered ("let a teammate start runs", "stop or remove an automation", "asks what they should add to their factory") and align one-to-one with the body's cases. A few natural terms are missing: the body's 'Change the agent or model' case loses 'agent' in the description, and there are no synonyms like 'pause', 'disable', or 'turn off'. Fits anchor 4, not 5's comprehensive synonym coverage.

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

"already set up on this repository" carves a clear niche that distinguishes it from a factory-setup skill, and Tessl-specific terms (Code Review, setup hook, cloud environment) are distinct. However, triggers like "add another automation" overlap the closely related factory-setup/understand-factory skills, matching anchor 4's 'minor overlap risk with closely related skills' rather than 5's minimal conflict risk.