[han]

I think opener has a clear double. AKQx opposite partner's shortness is awesome to have on defense.

I also think the splinterer is too heavy.

[kenrexford]

Partnership definitions are key here, of course.

As an example, for me, I like for an immediate splinter to show only Aces and Spaces on the outside, perhaps with a King under and Ace (primes), plus internal keys. The normal expectation is, therefore, of something approaching Three with the Queen as a RKCB response. Two with the Queen is OK if there is a King under and Ace.

Weaker splinters are handled in another manner (through 3♣).

If that approach is used, the hand is wrong because the club King is wrong. Opener would expect ♠AK ♥HH or ♠A ♥AKQ.

If the approach, however, is to expect good trumps and split high honors, this is perfect. That's also a fair approach. Four possible covers, side covers split, answer of 2+Q or better.

I have no idea what the parameters of expectancy are, or what the inferences from not immediately splintering, in the partnership. But, rather than ask for opinionated drivel, why not discuss and agree?

As to the 5♥ call. It seems that Opener should have a method to explore hand-type better. The actual Responder's hand fits well in a 2+Q or better, split covers, approach. If that is the approach, then ♠A/♣K is great; ♠K/♣A is impossible. So, it seems that Opener should be 100%.

What about a fusion? 2+Q or better, with side kings as fourth cover allowed? Now, it seems that the focus on clubs seems critical, such that a 5♣ call may make sense.

In the end, however, it seems that the most practical solution is a forcing pass. If partner has four covers, with no wasted spade covers (defensive values), he will bid; if not, he will double. Thus, Opener gains most by passing.

6♥ seems odd if Opener had methods. He did not, apparently, so I understand the decision somewhat. Poor partnership agreement require wild ass guesses.