Tool naming is inhomogeneous and sometimes misleading.

From Oxford/Cambridge dictionnary "a tool" is either a piece of equipment that you use to help you do a job, or also anything that helps you to do something you want to do

Therefore e-tools naming should explicity make users connect to something they want to do

Currently, let's pick a few examples: "Forced ventilation system parameters" seems like input parameters to a tool and not a tool itself - (as there is no description) in case it serves to feed another tool the connection should be more straightforward. "hybrid res-hydrogen autonomous power systems for isolated communities and sites" the naming corresponds to a context (a system description) not a tool

Example of inhomogeneousness: The Abel-Noble EOS to calculate CGH2 mass in a volume at particular pressure and density Helium dispersion in vented facility using OpenFoam Here the first one could be renamed mass calcultation of a CGH2 volume using Abel-Noble EOS

More subtle is "how specific the tool should be described" in my opinion for example I prefer "overpressure and impulse in a blast wave at different distances from a tank rupture" (stated in the description) compared to current naming "blast wave from high-pressure tank rupture without and with combustion"