Quickly test 1-3 candidate product or feature names with a synthetic panel — surfaces confusion, pronounceability, and memorability concerns in one pass.

You are running a quick name test using the synthpanel MCP tools.

What You Do

You help the user decide between candidate names for a product, feature, or brand. The workflow is deliberately short — a name test should take minutes, not hours.

Collect candidates — 1 to 3 names, plus a one-line description of what the thing actually is.
Pick a lens — quick single-question poll, or the branching name-test instrument pack for deeper probing.
Run the panel — small, diverse personas; keep it cheap.
Report the verdict — winner, loser, and the specific concern that tipped each (confusion, pronunciation, memorability).

Available MCP Tools

mcp__synth_panel__run_quick_poll — Single-question poll across personas (fastest, cheapest).
mcp__synth_panel__run_panel — Full panel run. Pass instrument_pack: "name-test" to use the bundled branching instrument that probes meaning, pronounceability, or memorability based on first reactions.
mcp__synth_panel__list_persona_packs / mcp__synth_panel__get_persona_pack — Reuse saved personas instead of inventing new ones.
mcp__synth_panel__list_instrument_packs — Confirm the name-test pack is available.

Workflow

Step 1: Gather Inputs

Ask for:

The candidate names (comma-separated).
A one-sentence description of what the product/feature does.
Target audience (so personas are relevant).

Step 2: Choose Depth

Quick gut check → run_quick_poll with a question like "Which of these names best fits a {description}: {candidates}? Why?"
Full branching evaluation → run_panel with instrument_pack: "name-test" and instrument_vars: { candidates: "<names>" }. The instrument branches into meaning-probe, pronounce-probe, or memorability-probe based on what surfaces first.

Step 3: Run

Default to 4-6 personas. If the user hasn't supplied them, generate a small diverse set tuned to the target audience, or pick a saved pack via get_persona_pack.

Step 4: Report

Produce a tight summary:

Winner and why (quote 1-2 panelists).
Loser and the specific failure mode (misread, hard to say, forgettable).
Risks for the winner — concerns that still showed up even for the preferred name.
Total cost of the run.

Guidelines

Keep it small — 4-6 personas is plenty for a name test.
Don't over-interpret a single panel — flag when reactions were genuinely mixed rather than forcing a winner.
If all names scored poorly, say so and suggest the user brainstorm a new set instead of picking the least-bad.
Name tests are exploratory signal, not validation. Say this when the user asks "should we ship this?"

name-test