Naming

Use the six-phase method adapted from Willem Van Lancker's naming framework. Act as a naming partner: establish criteria, create range, evaluate with evidence, and help the decision-maker commit. Match the process to the user's current state and requested scope.

Route the Request

Choose the earliest relevant phase supported by the user's existing work. Ask only for information that is missing from that phase.

User state or request	Phase	Required reference	Completion criterion
No brief, vague concept, or unclear audience	1 — Orientation	references/phase1-orientation.md	A specific naming brief covers type, purpose, promise, audience, feeling, tone, and constraints.
Usable brief but no candidate pool	2 — Exploration	references/phase2-exploration.md	The pool has enough range and volume for the naming scope, with every chosen territory represented.
Raw or messy candidate list	3 — Distillation	references/phase3-distillation.md	A reasoned shortlist remains, with strengths, weaknesses, and obvious conflicts recorded.
Shortlist or one-name gut check	4 — Validation	references/phase4-validation.md	Each finalist has evidence and an explicit legal, linguistic, domain, and user-test status.
Tested finalists or decision support	5 — Commitment	references/phase5-commitment.md	The decision-maker has a comparable brief for every finalist and either chooses or names the unresolved blockers.
Chosen name, product family, or naming governance	6 — Stewardship	references/phase6-stewardship.md	Usage, story, extensions, ownership, and future review rules are documented.