Conciseness

The guidance is dense and domain-specific rather than padded with concepts Claude already knows, but the same-feature-first / right-to-left pull rule is stated in at least four places ("How to work with me", "Find a practical active-feature starting point", the pull-policy list, and calibration scenarios 1, 13, 14), and the solo-practitioner paragraph overlaps heavily with those scenarios. At ~185 lines it could be tightened noticeably without losing substance.

Actionability

For an instruction-only skill the guidance is fully executable: fifteen numbered interview questions, worked arithmetic ("For four active features, `4 × 1.5` gives a combined limit of six"), fifteen calibration scenarios with real numbers including a trap case, and a concrete Jira column-mapping pattern. The final output is specified as a nine-item deliverable.

Workflow Clarity

The sequence is explicit — interview phases (work → topology → evidence), active-feature starting point, five candidates with cross-checks, stage/queue configuration, pull policies, then a nine-item output checklist — with validation built in (Little's Law consistency check, sensitivity check, and tighten/loosen/redesign experiment signals acting as feedback loops). The opening note gates output until enough evidence exists.

Progressive Disclosure

Well-sectioned with ten clear headers and a clearly signaled one-hop external worked example ([`examples/wip-limit-worked-example.md`]). However no references/ bundle exists, the example and CREDITS.md live outside the skill directory via ../../ paths and could not be verified in this bundle, and the fifteen-scenario calibration section is long enough to be its own reference file.

Specificity

Lists multiple specific concrete actions covering the capability end to end: "Interviews you on workflow, human-agent topology, agent autonomy, shared constraints and replenishment evidence", "computes candidate limits and cross-checks them with Little's Law", "returns one starting configuration translated into board and agent pull policies". All verbs are third person with no vague filler.

Completeness

Explicitly answers both questions: the "what" is the full pipeline (interview, compute candidates, Little's Law cross-check, one starting configuration with pull policies) and the "when" is a concrete trigger clause — "Use when agents write much of the code and existing WIP limits no longer describe the system".

Trigger Term Quality

"WIP limits", "agents write much of the code", and "flow metrics" are natural phrases a user would say, and the anti-formula framing ("rather than a universal formula or people-divided-by-two") matches how the problem is voiced. However common synonyms such as "kanban" and the spelled-out "work in progress" are absent, so coverage is not comprehensive.

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

A clear niche (starting WIP limits for human-agent workflows) with explicit routing boundaries that reduce mis-triggering: "use flow-metrics-self-assessment" for the prior question and "run ai-activity-to-impact first" for broad AI-transformation questions. Minimal overlap with any generic skill.