gilde

← All craftbooks

Image SEO Rename & Tag

Media: imagesevalv1.0.0released 2026-06-05workflow: build-loop

Rename and tag a folder of images for SEO and findability — descriptive, hyphenated, keyword-rich filenames plus consistent metadata (title, caption, keyword tags) — driven by what each image actually depicts, while preserving a mapping back to the originals so links don't break silently. Scope FIRST the naming convention, keyword strategy, and collision/mapping rules, because bulk-renaming without a plan creates duplicate-name clashes and broken references; then process the folder and emit the rename map. Covers image SEO, filename optimization, descriptive renaming, alt/metadata tagging, and asset findability.

Steps

Entry step: scope. Each step names the specialist role it wants; the full working prompt is expandable.

  1. Scope the renameplannerentry

    lock naming convention, keywords, and collision/mapping rules

    Show working prompt
    1) List the folder and inventory current filenames and formats. 2) Lock the naming CONVENTION: lowercase, hyphen-separated, descriptive, keyword-first, no spaces/underscores/special chars, max length, and whether to keep a stable id suffix to guarantee uniqueness (e.g. red-running-shoe-side-01.jpg). 3) Define the keyword strategy (primary subject + 1-2 descriptive modifiers) and the metadata to attach (title, caption, keyword tags). 4) Lock collision handling (append -01/-02) and require a complete OLD→NEW mapping so references can be updated and nothing is lost. 5) Write an acceptance-criteria checklist: 'every new name is lowercase-hyphenated and describes the image', 'names are unique (no collisions)', 'a complete old→new map exists', 'metadata fields are populated from the image content', 'file extensions are preserved'. 6) Record convention + checklist via write_task_note AND to notes/scope.md.
  2. Process the folderdeveloper

    derive names from content, rename, and emit the map

    Show working prompt
    1) Read scope.md. 2) For each image, LOOK at it via the vision capability to derive an accurate descriptive name (primary subject + modifiers) and the metadata (title, caption, keyword tags) — never base the name on a meaningless original name. 3) Apply the naming convention exactly (lowercase, hyphens, keyword-first, extension preserved) and resolve collisions with the agreed suffix scheme. 4) Perform the renames (or stage to an out/ folder if non-destructive is requested) and write a complete OLD→NEW mapping to rename-map.json including the per-image metadata. 5) Validate the JSON parses and that no two new names collide and every original is represented. 6) write_task_note the map path and the count renamed. The gated deliverable is rename-map.json.
  3. Evaluatereviewer

    Grade the deliverable against every acceptance criterion. All pass → finish; any fail → loop back and fix the gap.

    Show working prompt
    1) Open rename-map.json and confirm it parses as valid JSON (PASS/FAIL). 2) Confirm every original file has an entry and the count matches the folder (PASS/FAIL). 3) Check new names against scope.md: lowercase-hyphenated, keyword-first, no collisions, extensions preserved (PASS/FAIL). 4) Spot-check 3-4 entries by opening the images — does the name actually describe the image and are metadata fields populated (PASS/FAIL)? 5) Write PASS/FAIL per criterion. Collisions, generic names, or missing entries → loop back to process.

Then route — this is the whole point of the loop:

- **Every criterion PASSES →** call `advance_task_step({ ref, stepId: "evaluate", next: "finish" })`.
- **Any criterion FAILS →** write the specific gaps to notes, then call `advance_task_step({ ref, stepId: "evaluate", next: "process" })` to loop back. The builder fixes exactly those gaps.

Never route to `finish` while any criterion is unmet. The build phase's completion gate already blocked a grossly-incomplete deliverable; your job is the judgment an automated check cannot make (does it actually work, read well, look right). After ~3 unproductive loops, stop and report DONE_WITH_CONCERNS so the user can step in.
  4. Finishdeveloper

    All acceptance criteria met. Stamp a short summary and report DONE.

    Show working prompt
    Every acceptance criterion passed. Write a one-paragraph DONE summary to task notes via `write_task_note`: what was built, the deliverable path(s), and a one-line confirmation that each criterion is met. Then report DONE.

Triggers

Phrases that suggest this craftbook to a crew.

Source

View this craftbook on GitHub · MIT license