The accusative singular masculine/neuter (or nominative singular neuter) headword, transmitted twice as qesmoto/kon, literally means 'law-producing' or 'order-producing'. It is attested elsewhere only in Nonnus, Paraphrase of the Gospel of John 9.145 (genitive case there), where it refers to Moses. However, assuming it is extracted from the quotation that follows here, it seems to be a mistake (made twice) for e(smoto/kon ('swarm-producing'); so LSJ s.v. See n. 2 below for more on the textual issue.
[1] It is uncertain whether "he" in this case refers to the author of the quotation which follows, and whether the commentator is explaining the headword as printed ('order-producing') or the alternative 'swarm-producing' (see preceding note). The gloss fits either.
[2] Greek Anthology 6.239.5 (Apollonides), addressed to an unnamed divinity; different parts of the same poem appear at sigma 734, tau 500 and theta 6. The headword qesmoto/kon appears both in the Suda mss and in the Palatine ms of the epigram. Gow-Page, following Salmasius, emend to e(smoto/kon ('swarm-producing'), which is unattested elsewhere but arguably makes better sense. Reiske suggested d' e(smoto/kon ('but may you make the swarm-producing...'), evidently to provide a letter (d) that could be misread into the initial q of the present headword, but as Gow-Page point out the conjunction is not appropriate in the context; instead, the corruption can be explained as a repetition of the initial letter of the previous word in the line qei/hs ('may you make').