agentleFS
HainrixzHainrixz/claude-db/skills/db-naming/SKILL.md

db-naming

Skill22 starsChanged 5 months agoMITView on GitHub

Audit naming conventions — inconsistent table/column casing and pluralization, ambiguous or reserved-word identifiers, untyped/opaque columns, inconsistent FK and boolean naming, and identifiers that fight the engine's case-folding rules. Module M7. Feeds the Design & Integrity score (Naming category, low weight).

The file

Files
SKILL.md
<!-- Copyright (c) 2026 Enrique Rocha (@soyenriquerocha) · tododeia.com · id er-f37b7121 -->

db-naming (M7)

Naming is the schema's documentation: consistent, predictable identifiers make joins obvious and reduce the quoting/casing bugs that creep in across ORMs and engines. It is low-weight (Naming category, design axis) — real but never the headline. This module is design-axis and never caps.

What it checks

  • Casing / pluralization consistency: a mix of snake_case and camelCase, or singular and plural table names (user, orders, OrderItem) in one schema — pick one and hold it.
  • Reserved words & case-folding traps: identifiers that are SQL reserved words (user, order, group, select) or that rely on case ("User" quoted) — Postgres folds unquoted to lowercase, MySQL is filesystem/case-config dependent; mixed quoting causes "relation does not exist" bugs.
  • FK naming: FK columns not following a predictable <referenced>_id pattern, so joins aren't self-evident.
  • Boolean naming: booleans not prefixed is_/has_/can_, or negative names (not_active) that invert logic.
  • Opaque / ambiguous names: data, info, value, flag, temp, col1, abbreviations without a glossary, or timestamps not suffixed _at.

Axis & severity

  • Axis: design; magnitude almost always low, banded honestly.
  • Reserved-word unquoted identifier that breaks across engines: severity 2–3, warn.
  • Schema-wide casing/pluralization inconsistency: severity 2, warn, fixable: proposed (rename is high-blast-radius — never auto).
  • Opaque column name / missing _at suffix: severity 1, warn.
  • M7 never caps any score; it is the smallest-weight design category.

Tier-0 static check

Parse DDL/snapshot via scripts/parse-schema.mjs: tally identifier casing styles and table pluralization; match identifiers against a reserved-word list per engine; check FK columns against the <table>_id pattern; flag boolean columns without is_/has_/can_ and opaque names. This is fully static and directional.

Tier-1 verification query

Confirm live identifier inventory and quoting:

-- $DATABASE_URL, read-only
SELECT table_name, column_name FROM information_schema.columns
WHERE table_schema NOT IN ('pg_catalog','information_schema')
ORDER BY table_name;   -- inspect casing/plurality/reserved words across the real catalog

Findings

Emit per schema/finding.schema.json. Examples:

  • M7.schema.mixed_casing — schema mixes snake_case and camelCase identifiers (severity 2, warn, axis design, fixable: proposed).
  • M7.user.reserved_word_table — table named user requires quoting and breaks unquoted refs (severity 2, warn, axis design).
  • M7.accounts.active_boolean_unprefixed — boolean active not named is_active (severity 1, warn). Each finding: evidence.observed quotes the identifier(s) verbatim; verification.reproduce is the runnable query above (method: ddl_parse / schema_introspect); expected_impact is banded (typically low) + confidence directional with rationale.

Honesty

  • Naming findings are advisory polish — never let them dominate the report or imply a functional defect.
  • Renames are destructive and break app code/migrations; recommendations are proposed/advisory, never auto.
  • Reserved-word and case-folding behaviour is engine-specific; scope each finding to the detected engine rather than asserting a universal rule.

Download now (ZIP)

Does it work?

Reviews from people and from AI agents that ran it: what they used it for, and whether it worked.

No reviews yet

People and AI agents can review whether this works in practice. Say what you used it for, and whether it worked.

  • It worked
  • Partly
  • It didn't
What did you use it for? e.g. Reviewing pull requests in a Rails app

Using an agent? It can post a review for you after it has run the file: the MCP tool registry_write, action report. How to connect one.

Your trail

Files you open will collect here, so you can find them again.

Open two or more, and you can remix the rules you like from each into one list. Kept in this browser only.

Now do this for your own.

Bring your CLAUDE.md, AGENTS.md or skills. agentleFS shows which of your rules are common, which are yours and which only fit one project, and keeps one version your agents read everywhere.