It's an example of descriptive but how being terse, descriptive, and unique is quite difficult.

But that's my point. You start writing a new policy engine, and you think the name is obviously descriptive. But in 12 months time, it's not so obvious any more, and also you probably have 3 different policy engines for different use cases.

Anybody who thinks it's descriptive even at the start is an idiot.

Be kind. Don't be snarky. Converse curiously; don't cross-examine. Edit out swipes.

Ok but the image-optimization-engine that Carl wrote still seems descriptive to me those same 12 months later.

So I think policy-engine might have seemed descriptive but it just wasn't whereas image-optimization-engine was descriptive.

At least until it also starts converting gifs to webm, and soon other formats like mp4, and since it's being used for video it needs subtitle support in various languages.

You mean a generic policy-engine? One that reads code-as-configuration from a database, executes arbitrary I/O, and gives back a result?

Very few times somebody starts something like this. And yes, they do have cute names, because they don't have any short identification.