clear-naming

English rendering of a source-document example: in_flight holds tasks already started but not finished. An opaque instruction to wait for the “in-flight tasks” to drain becomes “The scheduler waits for all running tasks to finish, then exits.” This improves the explanation only; running_tasks is an optional rename only when requested and after checking membership conditions. It is a documented example, not a run here. Document example

For a naming review, jargon cleanup, clearer explanation or requested project guidance. A normal coding request is not itself a request for an audit. The method distinguishes running tasks from requests awaiting responses and keeps established technical terms when they are accurate.

Use a host that reads local SKILL.md; README describes explicit invocation in Codex. Supply the relevant code or explanation and say whether you want advice or edits. It is instruction-only: README lists no runtime scripts, extra dependencies or external services. Project checks depend on the actual code change, not a bundled test runner.

For Codex, the README’s naming-review request invokes $clear-naming on the current changes’ names, comments and explanations, asking for suggestions first without file edits. It inspects definitions, callers, types and state changes, then reports location, actual meaning, proposed wording and reasons. If you explicitly request edits, it updates related references and runs proportionate checks. Only a request for lasting rules merges the two principles into the specified guidance file; existing equivalents remain a single copy.

Unknown meaning is a reason to retain the current name and ask for evidence, not guess a replacement. Public interfaces, persisted fields, configuration keys and protocol fields require compatibility review rather than local-variable treatment. Keep prerequisites, failure causes, time scope and uncertainty intact. Local clarification does not authorize a repository-wide rename or global guidance update; persistent rules still need usage feedback. The source adds no external runtime service, but does not define the host/model provider’s data handling or guarantee on-device confidentiality. The saved LICENSE is MIT.