Follow-up to the frontend pseudo-function style pass on branch claude/consistent-pseudo-function-style-G5I1a. The style guide (docs/reference/style-guide.md §7.4.1) now codifies the subject.verb() convention. Workflow names in .github/workflows/*.yml still use the older "Category: Action" pattern and are out of scope for that frontend-only PR.
Proposal
Rename workflow name: fields to pseudo-function style:
| Current |
Proposed |
Spec: Create |
spec.create() |
Impl: Generate |
impl.generate() |
Impl: Review |
impl.review() |
Impl: Repair |
impl.repair() |
Impl: Merge |
impl.merge() |
Bulk: Generate |
bulk.generate() |
Sync: PostgreSQL |
sync.postgres() |
Sync: Labels |
sync.labels() |
CI: Lint and Format Check |
ci.lint() |
CI: Tests |
ci.tests() |
File names (spec-create.yml, etc.) stay unchanged — only name: is touched.
Risks
- Branch-protection / required-checks: If any required status check references the old workflow/job name, protection rules must be updated in parallel. Audit before merging.
- External monitoring / dashboards: Anything that greps workflow names (Slack notifications, status badges, custom dashboards) needs an update.
- Developer muscle memory: Filter queries like
is:run workflow:"Spec: Create" stop matching.
- Job names vs workflow names: The
name: at the root is low-risk; renaming individual jobs.*.name is higher risk because downstream tooling often keys off them.
Scope suggestion
One PR, one atomic commit, update all workflow names + any referenced protection rules in the same go. Consider keeping job-level names as-is for the first pass.
Follow-up to the frontend pseudo-function style pass on branch
claude/consistent-pseudo-function-style-G5I1a. The style guide (docs/reference/style-guide.md§7.4.1) now codifies thesubject.verb()convention. Workflow names in.github/workflows/*.ymlstill use the older"Category: Action"pattern and are out of scope for that frontend-only PR.Proposal
Rename workflow
name:fields to pseudo-function style:Spec: Createspec.create()Impl: Generateimpl.generate()Impl: Reviewimpl.review()Impl: Repairimpl.repair()Impl: Mergeimpl.merge()Bulk: Generatebulk.generate()Sync: PostgreSQLsync.postgres()Sync: Labelssync.labels()CI: Lint and Format Checkci.lint()CI: Testsci.tests()File names (
spec-create.yml, etc.) stay unchanged — onlyname:is touched.Risks
is:run workflow:"Spec: Create"stop matching.name:at the root is low-risk; renaming individualjobs.*.nameis higher risk because downstream tooling often keys off them.Scope suggestion
One PR, one atomic commit, update all workflow names + any referenced protection rules in the same go. Consider keeping job-level names as-is for the first pass.