--- name: product-naming description: "Generate and evaluate names for a product, feature, or release. Use when asked to name a product/feature/company, brainstorm naming options, or choose between name candidates. Produces a shortlist of names across naming strategies, each with rationale, plus an evaluation against clear criteria (clarity, fit, memorability, availability checks to run) and a recommendation — not just a random list." --- # Product Naming Skill A name has to do a lot of work: signal what the thing is, fit the brand, be easy to say and remember, and not already be taken. This skill generates candidates across different naming strategies and then *evaluates* them against criteria — so you get a defensible shortlist and a recommendation, not a brainstorm dump. ## Working from a brief Given "name our new analytics feature", **produce names anyway** — infer the audience, the brand feel, and what the name must convey, and label assumptions. Always flag that **trademark, domain, and existing-use checks are required before adopting** any name — propose, don't certify availability. ## Required Inputs Ask for these only if they aren't already provided (else infer and label): - **What it is** — the product/feature, what it does, and the value it delivers. - **Audience & brand** — who it's for, the existing brand/name family, and the desired feel (serious, playful, technical, premium). - **Constraints** — must convey X, avoid Y, language/market considerations, length. - **Context** — is it a standalone brand, a sub-brand, or a feature within an existing product (descriptive often wins for features). ## Output Format ### Naming: [thing] **1. Direction** — a line on what the name should achieve and the strategy mix that fits. **2. Candidates by strategy** — a shortlist grouped by approach, each with a one-line rationale: | Strategy | Examples | Feel | |---|---|---| | Descriptive | (says what it does) | clear, SEO-friendly, lower distinctiveness | | Evocative / metaphor | (suggests a quality) | memorable, needs context | | Invented / coined | (new word) | ownable, needs building | | Compound / blend | (two ideas joined) | balance of clarity + distinctiveness | **3. Evaluation** — score the top candidates against criteria: | Name | Clear | On-brand | Memorable | Easy to say/spell | Extensible | Notes | |---|---|---|---|---|---|---| **4. Recommendation** — the top pick (or 2), why, and the **checks to run before committing**: trademark search, domain/handle availability, existing-product collision, and meaning in target languages. ## Quality Checks - [ ] Names span more than one strategy (not all coined, not all descriptive) - [ ] Each candidate has a rationale tied to what the name must convey - [ ] Top names are scored against explicit criteria, not vibes - [ ] For a *feature* within a product, descriptive/clear options are prioritised over clever ones - [ ] A recommendation is made, with required availability checks listed - [ ] Language/market pitfalls are flagged for the shortlist ## Anti-Patterns - [ ] Do not hand back a flat list with no evaluation or recommendation - [ ] Do not claim a name is "available" — you can't verify trademarks/domains; list the checks to run - [ ] Do not over-index on clever/coined names for features that just need to be findable - [ ] Do not ignore pronounceability/spelling — a name people can't say or type costs you word-of-mouth - [ ] Do not skip cross-language/meaning checks for names going to multiple markets ## Based On Brand & product naming practice — strategy-driven generation, criteria-based evaluation, and pre-adoption availability/meaning checks. ## Example Trigger Phrases - "Name this product." - "Brainstorm names for our feature." - "Choose between these name candidates." - "Name our company."