/**
 * What a new agent may be called — ONE rule, shared by the dialog and the
 * route (SAP-2981).
 *
 * The dialog validates as you type so the refusal arrives before the click, and
 * `POST /api/agents/scaffold` refuses again on its own findings because a
 * disabled button is not a permission system. Those are two guards, and two
 * guards written twice become two different rules: a name the field accepts and
 * the server rejects reads as a broken app, and a name the server would accept
 * but the field greys out reads as an arbitrary one. So the rule lives here and
 * both sides import it.
 *
 * It is deliberately a folder-name rule, not a naming-convention one. The agent
 * gets a directory inside the project, and everything refused below is refused
 * because of what it would do to that directory — not because of house style.
 */
/**
 * Why this name cannot be a new agent's folder, or null when it can.
 *
 * The message is shown verbatim, so each sentence says what to do rather than
 * what a regex thinks. The leading-dot refusal is the one that is not about
 * path escape: a dotted directory is skipped by the agent scan, so `.notes`
 * would scaffold successfully and then never appear in the rail — the exact
 * "did it work?" failure the create endpoint exists to end.
 */
export declare function refuseAgentName(name: unknown): string | null;
//# sourceMappingURL=agent-name.d.ts.map