[prajwalu142]

Currently the naming convention tests skip ams tokens. Add botTokens and botOfcTokens to the naming tests so that any bad entry is caught early.

What changed

• Include botTokens and botOfcTokens in the allTokens list of modules/statics/test/unit/tokenNamingConvention.ts, so AMS-onboarded tokens flow through the same naming validations as every other token.
• Import both lists with relative paths (../../src/coins/...). The previous non-relative modules/statics/... imports were resolved as an external package named modules, which is what failed the code-quality (dependencies) check.
• Apply the testnet t-prefix and mainnet t-rules to the underlying coin name for OFC tokens, which are named ofc + the coin name (e.g. ofctsol:usdc is ofc + tsol:usdc). Correctly named OFC entries pass, and only genuine deviations surface — otherwise every future correctly named OFC testnet token would fail the raw t rule and need a permanent exception.
• Document the pre-existing AMS entries that legitimately deviate from the conventions (Hoodi hteth on-chain symbol names such as hteth:WBTC, ethx1, and the WBTC casing) in the exception lists, matching how earlier AMS tokens were handled. No token definitions were changed — e.g. hteth:wbtc already exists in erc20Coins, so hteth:WBTC cannot be renamed without colliding.

Why

Auto-AMS onboarded tokens bypassed every naming validation because the naming tests did not include the bot token lists, so bad entries could ship unnoticed (see the thread referenced in CSHLD-1931). With this change, future AMS entries are validated on arrival; only the listed pre-existing entries are exempted.

Verification

• Full @bitgo/statics unit suite: 39,670 passing, 0 failing (includes the 5 token naming convention tests and the 4 OFC naming tests)
• yarn run check-deps passes (previously failed on the phantom modules package)
• prettier --check clean in modules/statics

Ticket: CSHLD-1931

[github-actions]

⚠️ Unit tests are failing on Node 26.x (Current release line, non-blocking). This is not an LTS version yet, so it does not block merge, but it signals an incompatibility to fix before Node 26.x becomes LTS.

View run

[linear-code]

CSHLD-1931