... by "meaningless".

OK, so you want the labels to be "self-commenting"?

Isn't that YOU who speak against the "self-commenting code" idea?

The whole idea of "neat code" is much of psychologic character hence subjective (unless "commonly accepted style" is around, which for asm is AFAIK not - please correct me if I am wrong).

My way is, spare time by not thinking on creating label names inside a routine, spend the same time on commenting.
This pays off, as some of the labels (my guess is >50%) are trivial=meaningless, but there are other places without labels worth commenting. In my way, to read the program, you need to look only at the comments.

Simplistic and slightly exagerrated example:

CompareNum:
   mov   a,Num1
   cjne  a,Num2,CompareNum_1
   blah  blah1                    ;if Num1=Num2
   blah  blah2                         ;do blahblah
   sjmp  CompareNum_9         
CompareNum_1:
   jc    CompareNum_2
   blah  blah3                    ;if Num1<Num2
   blah  blah4                         ;do something else
   sjmp  CompareNum_9
CompareNum_2:
   blah  blah5                    ;if Num1>Num2
   blah  blah6                        ;do something
   blah  blah7                        ;and fallthrough to end
CompareNum_9:
   ret

Also, using a character not used elsewhere (e.g. underscore - although I use a different character, I don't like underscores) for the unimportant labels, one quickly develops a habit to ignore the unimportant labels and see the important (routine names) only.

This might work for one and might not for other, of course.

JW