new jira ticket writing skill and details on paying attention to names

plugins/compound-engineering/commands/workflows/review.md

@@ -179,6 +179,30 @@ Complete system context map with component interactions
 - Engineering best practices
 - Technical documentation quality
 - Tooling and automation assessment
+- **Naming accuracy** (see Naming Scrutiny below)
+
+#### Naming Scrutiny (REQUIRED)
+
+Every name introduced or modified in the PR must pass these checks:
+
+| # | Check | Question |
+|---|-------|----------|
+| 1 | **Caller's perspective** | Does the name describe what it does, not how? |
+| 2 | **No false qualifiers** | Does every `_with_X` / `_and_X` reflect a real choice? |
+| 3 | **Visibility matches intent** | Are private helpers actually private? |
+| 4 | **Consistent convention** | Does the pattern match every other instance in the codebase? |
+| 5 | **Precise, not vague** | Could this name apply to ten different things? (`data`, `manager`, `handler` = red flags) |
+| 6 | **Complete words** | No ambiguous abbreviations? (`auth` = authentication or authorization?) |
+| 7 | **Correct part of speech** | Functions = verbs, classes = nouns, booleans = assertions? |
+
+**Common anti-patterns to flag:**
+- False optionality: `save_with_validation()` when validation is mandatory
+- Leaked implementation: `create_batch_with_items()` when callers just need `create_batch()`
+- Type encoding: `word_string`, `new_hash` instead of domain terms
+- Structural naming: `input`, `output`, `result` instead of what they contain
+- Doppelgangers: names differing by one letter (`useProfileQuery` vs `useProfilesQuery`)
+
+Include naming findings in the synthesized review. Flag as P2 (Important) unless the name is actively misleading about behavior (P1).
 
 #### Business Value Angle