agentleFS
Sign inStart free
uwuclxdyuwuclxdy/agenticat/skills/name-check/SKILL.md

name-check

Skill7 starsChanged 19 days agoMITView on GitHub

Suggests project and crate names and checks availability across crates.io, npm, PyPI, AUR, GitHub, and domains.

The file

We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent

2 rules. About 0 are common, 2 are distinctive, and 0 are very specific to this project.

  • ≈0

    Common · estimate

    Many files like this have a rule of this kind.

  • ≈2

    Distinctive · estimate

    This author's own choices. Worth a look.

  • 0

    Very specific

    Tied to their project's names, files or tools. Probably skip.

  • Common
  • Distinctive
  • Very specific
  1. Distinctive:

    does not do web collision.

    line 42
  2. Distinctive:

    Never reserve, publish, or rename anything.

    line 47

≈ “Common” is an estimate: at least 1 in 5 of the 350,495 skill files we read have a rule of the same kind, not the same words. “Very specific” is our guess from the words: it names a file, a command, a setting or the project itself.

Keep what fits and drop the rest. Your version, ready for your agents.
Files
SKILL.md

Name Check

Procedure

  1. Scope first (before a rename or release). Establish from context (ask if unsure):
    • what the thing does, in one line
    • which registries matter: crates.io, AUR, PyPI, npm, GitHub, KDE store, domain... Check only relevant registries depending on the project.
    • rename cost: unpublished (cheap, anything goes) vs already public (flag every rename consequence)
  2. Generate 10-30 candidates. Brainstorm and balance three axes:
    • explicit: name states the function (kate-markdown-preview over katdown)
    • brandable: short, lowercase, occasionally punny (flit, nook, perch)
    • user-fit: closest to the user's stated direction Mark each candidate with which axis it leans toward. Reserve companion names too when relevant (flit + flitd + flit-mcp).
  3. Check availability in parallel. Fan out searches (web + registry pages) per candidate:
    • exact match on each relevant registry
    • general web collision: existing project, product, or company with the same name in the same space
    • near-collisions worth flagging (one-letter-off popular project, trademark-adjacent)
  4. Report as a table with these columns:
candidate<one column per relevant registry>web collisionnote

free / taken (link) / near: <what> per cell. End with one recommendation and why.

Helper

name-check.ts (same dir as the skill, requires bun) runs the deterministic registry axis in one pass to spare you the manual fetching:

bun name-check.ts <name> [<name>...] [--table] [--registry npm,crates,...] [--tld com,io]

  • compact JSON by default; --table for a quick scan, --list for registry ids.
  • supports npm, PyPI, crates.io, RubyGems, Hackage, Go, Docker (library), Homebrew, AUR, NuGet, GitHub, plus domain availability (RDAP, DNS-confirmed on a 404).
  • domain checks run only when --registry is unset or explicitly includes domain (e.g. --registry npm,domain). The flag is not additive by default for domains.
  • does not do web collision. still run that axis via WebSearch (same-space products, companies, trademarks) and fold both into the report table. Not a legal trademark search either (see Rules).
  • registry read-only.

Rules

  • Never reserve, publish, or rename anything. This flow is report only; renames require the user's call.
  • "Free" claims must come from an actual lookup this session, not memory.
  • If every candidate is taken, say so and generate a second batch instead of stretching a bad fit. Taken by an abandoned or dead project still counts as taken. Do not attempt reclaim, transfer, or dispute (each registry has its own policy for that). Report it as taken and let the user decide.
  • Registry and WebSearch checks are not a legal trademark search. Flag trademark-adjacent hits. Tell the user to run a formal search (USPTO, EUIPO, local registry) before any commercial release.

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.

Check your setup, free