deprecated/naming-agent-skills/SKILL.md
Deprecated compatibility reference for choosing, reviewing, renaming, or standardizing agent skill names. Use the active creating-agent-skills workflow for current naming and authorized repository rename work.
npx skillsauth add narumiruna/agent-skills naming-agent-skillsInstall this skill globally with one command. Works with Claude Code, Cursor, and Windsurf.
3 of 9 scanners reported clean
Some scanners were skipped, did not run, or reported a non-clean status. Review each row below.
Use creating-agent-skills for the maintained workflow. This reference preserves the former $naming-agent-skills behavior for explicit local use.
Name the task and trigger the skill represents, not its implementation.
helper, utils, tools, assistant, magic, smart, general, data, files, or documents.Use <verb-ing>-<object> as a useful default, not a mandate. Preserve the skill's original meaning when another pattern is clearer or the library has an established convention. Domain-first or command-style names are valid when they match the surrounding collection.
Prefer analyzing-test-results over parse-json, and adding-message-timestamps over a product-prefixed name unless the behavior is product-specific.
Distinguish a naming recommendation from a requested repository rename. Do not edit files when the user asked only for names or review.
For an authorized rename, use the skill-maintenance workflow and update the directory, frontmatter name, UI metadata/default prompt, catalog, links, examples, tests, and other exact-name references as one bounded change. Preserve compatibility notes when external consumers depend on the old name, then run repository validation.
Lead with the recommendation or verdict and its brief reason. For multiple skills, use a current/recommended/reason table. Include conflicts or compatibility work that would affect adoption; omit formulaic alternatives and repeated rules.
development
Score or compare one or more agent skills across trigger clarity, workflow actionability, safety boundaries, verification rigor, incremental knowledge value, and leanness. Use only when the user explicitly asks for ratings, numerical quality scores, rubric-based scorecards, or scored comparisons; use creating-agent-skills for unscored reviews or revisions.
development
Assess or improve an existing codebase's architecture when the user asks about module boundaries, coupling, scattered ownership, testability, change locality, deep modules, seams, or behavior-preserving structural refactoring. Use for cross-module design rather than ordinary diff review or a confirmed edge-case bug fix.
development
Perform read-only security audits, vulnerability assessments, or threat-focused reviews of diffs, pull requests, code paths, or explicitly scoped repositories when security is the primary objective or acceptance criterion. Use reviewing-code for ordinary review with baseline security coverage and hardening-code-paths for fixing confirmed findings.
development
Run iterative multi-reviewer panels over a code diff, verify their findings, apply explicitly authorized fixes, and re-review the updated change until it passes or reaches a stopping condition. Use when the user asks for a panel loop, multi-model code-review consensus, or a review-fix-re-review cycle.