naming-6-gates — independently scanned and version-tracked by SaferSkills.
SaferSkills independently audited naming-6-gates (Agent Skill) and scored it 100/100 (green). The audit ran 55 deterministic rules across Security, Supply Chain, Maintenance, Transparency, and Community; it found 0 high-severity and 0 lower-severity findings. The full rule-by-rule trace and per-finding evidence are below. Free, methodology-open.
Findings & checks · 0 flagged
Every scanned point with the score it earned and what moved between them.
First recorded scan — no prior version to compare against.
The primary manifest — the file an agent reads to learn what this artifact does.
Brand naming in 2026 is architectural engineering, not creative brainstorming. A name must be:
Core principle: Optimize for AEO (Answer Engine Optimization) first, aesthetics second.
digraph naming_process {
rankdir=TB;
node [shape=box];
brief [label="1. BRIEF\nDefine constraints"];
generate [label="2. GENERATE\nAI-assisted creation"];
filter [label="3. LINGUISTIC FILTER\nMultilingual stress test"];
legal [label="4. LEGAL FILTER\nTrademark screening"];
aeo [label="5. AEO FILTER\nEntity strength test"];
story [label="6. STORY FILTER\nNarrative potential"];
brief -> generate -> filter -> legal -> aeo -> story;
filter -> generate [label="fails" style=dashed];
legal -> generate [label="conflicts" style=dashed];
aeo -> generate [label="weak entity" style=dashed];
story -> generate [label="no narrative" style=dashed];
}Define hard constraints BEFORE generating:
| Constraint | Target | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Length | 7-8 letters max | Mobile icons, cognitive load, tokenization |
| Syllables | 1-3 syllables | Voice invocation, memorability |
| Character set | A-Z only | Domain availability, global keyboards |
| Forbidden sequences | ght, ough, silent letters | Pronunciation barriers |
Output format:
brief:
max_letters: 8
max_syllables: 3
target_markets: [FR, ES, US, UK]
nice_classes: [9, 35, 42]
avoid_phonemes: [ʒ, θ, ð] # Hard for non-native speakers
competitor_names: [Notion, Figma, Linear] # Style reference
forbidden_associations: [medical, financial, religious]Use structured prompting with 5 typologies:
Words from unrelated domains applied to new context.
Abstract concepts made concrete.
New words with phonetic engineering.
Blend of two meaningful words.
Meaningless but phonetically pleasing.
Generation Contract:
CONSTRAINTS:
- Max 8 letters
- Pronounceable in French, Spanish, English
- No existing trademark in Class 42
- Distinct from: [competitor list]
OUTPUT FORMAT per candidate:
- Name: [word]
- Typology: [1-5]
- Phonetic: /IPA transcription/
- Syllables: [count]
- Rationale: [1 sentence]Test each candidate across target markets:
Run through TTS engines in 15+ languages:
Verify no negative meanings in:
| Hazard | Example | Impact |
|---|---|---|
| Silent letters | "Knight" | Voice assistant failure |
| Consonant clusters | "Strengths" | Non-native difficulty |
| Ambiguous vowels | "Read" (reed/red) | Confusion |
| Cross-language homophones | "Gift" (poison in German) | Negative association |
Kill criterion: If TTS mispronounces in >2 target markets, reject.
| Registry | Tool | Check For |
|---|---|---|
| France | INPI data.inpi.fr | Exact + phonetic similarity |
| EU | EUIPO eSearch / TMview | Same Nice classes |
| US | USPTO TESS | Registered + pending |
| International | WIPO Global Brand Database | Madrid Protocol |
EUIPO "Early TM Screening" detects:
Kill criterion: Any conflict in target Nice classes → reject.
A name must be recognizable as a distinct entity by AI systems.
Prompt to test:
"What is [NAME]?"
GOOD response: "I don't have information about [NAME]" (clean slate)
BAD response: "[NAME] is a common word meaning..." (collision)
BAD response: "[NAME] could refer to several things..." (ambiguity)Use Semrush/Ahrefs:
Kill criterion: If name collides with high-volume generic term, reject.
A name must be "tell-able" - capable of carrying a brand story.
For each candidate, verify you can build:
| Pillar | Question | Example Answer Required |
|---|---|---|
| Origin story | "Why this name?" | Must have a genuine, shareable reason |
| Belief story | What does the brand stand for? | Values must connect to name |
| Product truth | What does it actually do? | Name should hint at function |
| Transformation | What changes for the customer? | Before/after must be nameable |
| Culture | What kind of community forms? | Name should enable identity |
Both work. But you must choose consciously and build accordingly.
Say the name aloud 10 times. Ask:
Kill criterion: If you can't tell a compelling origin story, reject.
| Assistant | Invocation Rules | Rejection Risks |
|---|---|---|
| Alexa | 2+ words required (unless trademarked) | Single generic words |
| Siri | Must be phonetically distinct | Confusion with system commands |
| Strong Knowledge Graph presence needed | Names too similar to famous brands | |
| Bixby | Avoid wake-word conflicts | "Open", "cancel", common verbs |
Test procedure:
For the final candidate, produce:
## [NAME] - Naming Dossier
### Basic Info
- **Name:** [word]
- **Typology:** [1-5]
- **Phonetic:** /IPA/
- **Length:** X letters, Y syllables
### Linguistic Clearance
- FR pronunciation: [pass/fail + notes]
- ES pronunciation: [pass/fail + notes]
- EN pronunciation: [pass/fail + notes]
- Cultural flags: [none / list]
### Legal Clearance
- INPI (FR): [clear / conflict]
- EUIPO (EU): [clear / conflict]
- USPTO (US): [clear / conflict]
- Domains available: [list]
- Social handles: [list]
### AEO Score
- Entity uniqueness: [1-10]
- Keyword difficulty: [score]
- Tokenization: [single/split]
### Narrative Potential
- Origin story hook: [1 sentence]
- Brand values connection: [1 sentence]
- Community identity: [suggested demonym]
### Voice Readiness
- Alexa: [pass/fail]
- Siri: [pass/fail]
- Google: [pass/fail]
### Recommendation
[APPROVED / NEEDS WORK / REJECTED]
[Final reasoning]| Mistake | Why It Fails | Fix |
|---|---|---|
| Starting with brainstorming | Generates unusable names | Start with constraints (Gate 1) |
| Skipping TTS test | Voice assistant failures | Always test pronunciation |
| Ignoring Nice class overlap | Trademark conflicts | Check specific classes, not just exact matches |
| Choosing descriptive names | Weak AEO, hard to trademark | Prefer distinctive/invented |
| No narrative test | Brand can't tell its story | Always verify storytelling potential |
The 7-8 Letter Rule: Shorter = better for mobile, voice, memory, tokenization.
Phonetic Gold Standard: CVCV pattern (consonant-vowel-consonant-vowel) works globally.
AEO Priority: If AI can't cite you as a distinct entity, you don't exist in 2026.
Empty Vessel Strategy: Meaningless names (Kodak) require more brand-building but face fewer conflicts.
Voice-First: If Alexa can't invoke it, 8.4 billion assistants can't recommend it.
| Claude handles | You provide |
|---|---|
| Generating candidates by typology | Brief constraints (markets, classes) |
| Running linguistic stress tests | Final pronunciation judgment |
| Checking trademark databases | Legal professional validation |
| Evaluating AEO/entity strength | Strategic brand direction |
| Producing naming dossier | Final selection and approval |
name: naming-6-gates
category: branding
version: 2.0
author: GUIA
source_expert: 6-Gate Protocol (AEO-first naming)
difficulty: advanced
mode: centaur
tags: [naming, branding, trademark, voice-assistant, aeo, entity]
created: 2026-02-03
updated: 2026-02-03~30 seconds. Free. No account. Every finding cites a rule and a line of evidence.