chore(skills): log workshop-start improvements from this run

Running notes for a later workshop-start pass: read-only participant agents
can't self-write output files (lead-as-scribe relay needed); SI has no
round-1 task; create+assign tasks before spawning; TaskCreate is one-per-call;
decision claim is not idempotent (caused a stray duplicate ID); the optional
scout-critic idea and its guardrails; and background always-present teammates
can be slow to consume shutdown_request at wrap-up.

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.8 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>

.claude/skills/workshop-start/IMPROVEMENTS.md

@@ -0,0 +1,87 @@
+# workshop-start — Improvement Log
+
+Running notes on friction and fixes observed while running workshops. Fold the
+confirmed ones into `SKILL.md` periodically; delete once applied.
+
+## From the `system-economic-specialization` relaunch (2026-05-31)
+
+- **Tool name drift.** SKILL.md §5 says "Use the **Task tool** to spawn each
+  agent." The actual spawn tool is **`Agent`** (with `team_name` + `name` +
+  `subagent_type`). "Task" reads as the TaskCreate/TaskUpdate family and is
+  misleading. Rename to "Agent tool" throughout §5.
+
+- **SI has no Round 1 work — say so.** The skill adds SI to every workshop but
+  SI's job is Round 2 ticket creation. Round 1 there is no SI task, so SI sits
+  with an empty TaskList and no instruction. Recommend the skill explicitly note:
+  "SI joins on standby; SI gets no task until Round 2 — spawn it in background
+  with a 'load context and wait for Round 2' prompt." Avoids an idle/confused
+  agent on spawn.
+
+- **Spawn order vs. task creation.** Following the skill literally (§4 create
+  tasks → §5 spawn) matters: if you spawn agents before the tasks exist, they
+  check TaskList, find nothing, and may idle. Worth a one-line warning in §5:
+  "Create and assign all Round 1 tasks BEFORE spawning, or the agents wake to an
+  empty list." (Recoverable by messaging them after, but cleaner to order it
+  right.)
+
+- **`TaskCreate` is one-task-per-call.** No batch/array form. A batch attempt is
+  rejected. The skill could state this so the lead emits N separate TaskCreate
+  calls (and assigns owners via TaskUpdate, since TaskCreate takes no `owner`).
+
+- **Read-only participants can't write their own files.** Several workshop agent
+  types (paula, gore, nigel, ozzie, and the read-only miri variant) have NO Write
+  tool — yet SKILL.md §4 makes "write your full output to disk" a hard
+  requirement for every participant. Paula hit this: she produced her full Round 1
+  doc but had to send it to the lead to write `paula-round1.md`. The skill should
+  state up front: "Participants without a Write tool deliver their output via
+  SendMessage; the lead writes the file and marks the task complete on their
+  behalf." Or: assign a write-capable scribe. Either way, don't make disk-write a
+  per-agent requirement for read-only agent types — it guarantees a manual relay.
+
+- **Participants self-claim, which races owner assignment.** Paula picked up
+  task #3 on her own before the lead assigned owners. Harmless here, but if tasks
+  aren't clearly scoped per-agent an agent could grab the wrong one. The skill's
+  per-agent task titles ("Round 1 — Miri …") mitigate this; keep titles
+  agent-named.
+
+## Candidate feature — per-round "scout" critic (user idea, 2026-05-31)
+
+Add an optional independent **scout** agent that runs per round, AFTER the round's
+output files land and BEFORE the user checkpoint, to surface missed options,
+simpler designs, internal contradictions, and external design prior-art.
+
+- **Value is mostly the independent adversarial review**, not the web. Participants
+  build on each other and converge; a fresh agent with no stake catches blind
+  spots convergence hides. Web search is a bonus, useful for the *mechanism* (real
+  economic geography, how other games encode X, schema-granularity tradeoffs) —
+  NOT the lore.
+- **Hard guardrails:** (1) lore is authored-canonical and fictional — the scout must
+  NOT "correct" the fiction with real-world/web facts; scope web to design/mechanism
+  prior-art only. (2) Only surface findings that would CHANGE a decision — a critic
+  that always finds 10 things gets ignored.
+- **Shape:** cheap model (Haiku), `run_in_background: true`, reads the round files +
+  relevant D-records, writes `scout-round{N}.md`. Lead folds decision-changing items
+  into the checkpoint presented to the user. Escalate to Sonnet only to dig into a
+  real find.
+- Pairs well with the quality-over-scope-creep principle: the scout is a cheap way
+  to pressure-test that "quality" claims actually hold and nothing simpler was missed.
+
+## Wrap-up gotchas (2026-05-31)
+
+- **`decision claim` is NOT idempotent.** Each call burns the next ID and appends a
+  placeholder. Retrying it (e.g. after misreading an unrelated error) creates a
+  DUPLICATE record that must be hand-removed before filing. Before re-running claim,
+  check `decision next D` / grep the domain file. The wrap-up step should claim each
+  ID exactly once and record it immediately.
+- **Read-only documenter can still file**, but the lead must hand it the exact ID(s)
+  and the "remove any stray placeholder" instruction — the claim/file split is where
+  duplicate IDs sneak in.
+- **Background (`run_in_background`) teammates can be slow/unreliable to consume
+  `shutdown_request`.** At wrap-up, qatux + si (both spawned in background per the
+  skill's §5 guidance) stayed "active" through multiple shutdown sends, blocking
+  TeamDelete. Foreground participants shut down immediately. Options to fold into
+  the skill: (a) don't background the always-present agents, or (b) document that
+  wrap-up may need several shutdown retries / a longer settle, and that the lead
+  should not spin indefinitely — the work is already on disk, TeamDelete is just
+  resource cleanup. Consider whether the skill should note the team can be left to
+  expire rather than blocking the session on cleanup.