In the book "Chaos and Harmony" by Thrinh Xuan Thuan, Thuan talks about the beauty in science. To do so, he first clearly and explicitly defines what a beautiful theorem might "look" like, or rather how a theorem might qualify as being beautiful. I feel that using Thuan's text as a template (or even just an example) one should be able to produce a pattern that describes at least some aspect or manifestation of the quality (or most likely a set of qualities disguised as a single quality) that QualityWithoutaName attempts to cover up with a bush and then beat around.

It's simple... First you smash this nebulous pseudo-quality into definable parts, i.e.:
(This is a grossly incomplete list...)

'''Functionality''' - 
The ability of a pattern or application to function. More specifically how closely it's abilities coincide with it's defined purpose or goal. "Does it do what it is designed to do?"

'''Usability''' - 
This could be defined as the function of the application's learning curve. Or in the case of a pattern, one could define this as set of domains to which this pattern can be applied.

'''YouGetTheIdea...'''