Music (or any other art form) can't possibly be judged with a checklist.
I totally agree with you.
But just taking your Britney Spears vs Radiohead argument a step further, even if Britney's album scores highly for catchiness it is likely to get a low score for the other categories, whereas Radiohead may not be so instantly accessible but an album of theirs will contain greater lyrical depth, more musical originality, a more dynamic approach across the whole record, and will doubtless have had a lot more thought gone into the cover art than the average Britney album.
So using that system (and I'm really generalizing here), the Britney album may get a rating of 5, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, and that would tell another person that this album is a lightweight pop album.
Radiohead, meanwhile, might be more like 1, 5, 5, 5, 5, 5, 5, 5, 5, 5. It will be obvious that it is an album to be enjoyed on a much deeper level.
The Beatles, of course, would score 5's across the board
But, just to reiterate here, I am just playing "devil's advocate" and I do agree that art is to be enjoyed subjectively and shouldn't be reduced to figures in a spreadsheet or whatever.