privateboard 0.1.3 → 0.1.5

package/dist/cli.js

@@ -368,6 +368,14 @@ var init_brief_assets = __esm({
   }
 });
 
+// src/storage/migrations/024_usage_daily.sql
+var usage_daily_default;
+var init_usage_daily = __esm({
+  "src/storage/migrations/024_usage_daily.sql"() {
+    usage_daily_default = "-- Daily-granularity token usage log \xB7 the cumulative `agents.tokens_consumed`\n-- column stays the canonical \"All / lifetime\" total, but the user-settings\n-- Usage panel now also renders a 14-day stacked bar chart that needs\n-- per-day-per-model resolution. This table is the source for that chart.\n--\n-- Granularity: (day \xB7 agent_id \xB7 model_v).\n--   day      \xB7 'YYYY-MM-DD' formatted in the server's local time at\n--              billing time. Local-first software running on the user's\n--              own machine, so wall-clock matches their intuition of\n--              \"today\" without TZ gymnastics on the client.\n--   agent_id \xB7 who actually spoke that day (the column the UI uses to\n--              render per-agent rows in the day's drill-down).\n--   model_v  \xB7 SNAPSHOT at billing time. If the user reassigns an\n--              agent's model later, that day's history stays tied to\n--              the model that actually ran \u2014 without this, all of an\n--              agent's history would silently re-skin under the new\n--              model on next chart render.\n--\n-- Writes happen atomically alongside the `agents.tokens_consumed`\n-- update in `incrementAgentTokens()` (UPSERT here, UPDATE there, single\n-- transaction). Single chokepoint; every billing path (director turns,\n-- chair turns, brief stages 1/1.5/2/3) flows through it.\n--\n-- No backfill: pre-migration cumulative stays in `agents.tokens_consumed`\n-- and continues to drive the \"All \xB7 cumulative\" view in the UI. Day-level\n-- history begins from migration day; days before that render as empty\n-- bars in the 14-day chart.\n\nCREATE TABLE IF NOT EXISTS usage_daily (\n  day      TEXT    NOT NULL,\n  agent_id TEXT    NOT NULL,\n  model_v  TEXT    NOT NULL,\n  tokens   INTEGER NOT NULL DEFAULT 0,\n  PRIMARY KEY (day, agent_id, model_v)\n);\n\n-- Day-only index for the 14-day window query (`WHERE day >= ?`). The\n-- composite primary key already covers (day, agent_id, ...) in lookup\n-- order so the per-row UPSERT path doesn't need a separate index.\nCREATE INDEX IF NOT EXISTS usage_daily_day ON usage_daily(day);\n";
+  }
+});
+
 // src/storage/db.ts
 var db_exports = {};
 __export(db_exports, {
@@ -448,6 +456,7 @@ var init_db = __esm({
     init_notes();
     init_intensity_brutal_to_terse();
     init_brief_assets();
+    init_usage_daily();
     MIGRATIONS = [
       { name: "001_init.sql", sql: init_default },
       { name: "002_default_opus.sql", sql: default_opus_default },
@@ -471,7 +480,8 @@ var init_db = __esm({
       { name: "020_room_followup.sql", sql: room_followup_default },
       { name: "021_notes.sql", sql: notes_default },
       { name: "022_intensity_brutal_to_terse.sql", sql: intensity_brutal_to_terse_default },
-      { name: "023_brief_assets.sql", sql: brief_assets_default }
+      { name: "023_brief_assets.sql", sql: brief_assets_default },
+      { name: "024_usage_daily.sql", sql: usage_daily_default }
     ];
     _db = null;
   }
@@ -571,7 +581,25 @@ function getAgentStats(agentId) {
 }
 function incrementAgentTokens(agentId, delta) {
   if (!Number.isFinite(delta) || delta <= 0) return;
-  getDb().prepare("UPDATE agents SET tokens_consumed = tokens_consumed + ? WHERE id = ?").run(Math.round(delta), agentId);
+  const tokens = Math.round(delta);
+  const day = formatLocalDay(/* @__PURE__ */ new Date());
+  const db = getDb();
+  const tx = db.transaction(() => {
+    const agentRow = db.prepare("SELECT model_v FROM agents WHERE id = ?").get(agentId);
+    if (!agentRow) return;
+    db.prepare("UPDATE agents SET tokens_consumed = tokens_consumed + ? WHERE id = ?").run(tokens, agentId);
+    db.prepare(
+      `INSERT INTO usage_daily (day, agent_id, model_v, tokens) VALUES (?, ?, ?, ?)
+       ON CONFLICT(day, agent_id, model_v) DO UPDATE SET tokens = tokens + excluded.tokens`
+    ).run(day, agentId, agentRow.model_v, tokens);
+  });
+  tx();
+}
+function formatLocalDay(d) {
+  const y = d.getFullYear();
+  const m = String(d.getMonth() + 1).padStart(2, "0");
+  const day = String(d.getDate()).padStart(2, "0");
+  return `${y}-${m}-${day}`;
 }
 function getUsageSummary() {
   const db = getDb();
@@ -627,9 +655,80 @@ function getUsageSummary() {
       tokens: retiredTokens,
       agents: retiredAgents,
       byModel: retiredByModel.sort((a, b) => b.tokens - a.tokens)
-    }
+    },
+    daily: getDailyUsage(14)
   };
 }
+function getDailyUsage(days) {
+  const today = /* @__PURE__ */ new Date();
+  const out = [];
+  const dayIndex = /* @__PURE__ */ new Map();
+  for (let i = days - 1; i >= 0; i--) {
+    const d = new Date(today);
+    d.setDate(d.getDate() - i);
+    const key = formatLocalDay(d);
+    const row = { day: key, totalTokens: 0, byModel: [], byAgent: [] };
+    out.push(row);
+    dayIndex.set(key, row);
+  }
+  if (out.length === 0) return out;
+  const earliest = out[0].day;
+  const rows = getDb().prepare(
+    `SELECT u.day      AS day,
+              u.agent_id AS agentId,
+              u.model_v  AS modelV,
+              u.tokens   AS tokens,
+              a.name     AS name,
+              a.handle   AS handle,
+              a.role_kind AS roleKind
+         FROM usage_daily u
+         LEFT JOIN agents a ON a.id = u.agent_id
+        WHERE u.day >= ?
+        ORDER BY u.day ASC`
+  ).all(earliest);
+  const modelBuckets = /* @__PURE__ */ new Map();
+  const agentBuckets = /* @__PURE__ */ new Map();
+  for (const r of rows) {
+    if (!dayIndex.has(r.day)) continue;
+    let mb = modelBuckets.get(r.day);
+    if (!mb) {
+      mb = /* @__PURE__ */ new Map();
+      modelBuckets.set(r.day, mb);
+    }
+    const mEntry = mb.get(r.modelV) ?? { tokens: 0, agents: /* @__PURE__ */ new Set() };
+    mEntry.tokens += r.tokens;
+    mEntry.agents.add(r.agentId);
+    mb.set(r.modelV, mEntry);
+    let ab = agentBuckets.get(r.day);
+    if (!ab) {
+      ab = /* @__PURE__ */ new Map();
+      agentBuckets.set(r.day, ab);
+    }
+    const aEntry = ab.get(r.agentId) ?? {
+      id: r.agentId,
+      name: r.name ?? "(retired)",
+      handle: r.handle ?? "",
+      modelV: r.modelV,
+      // the day-prevalent model snapshot
+      roleKind: r.roleKind === "moderator" ? "moderator" : "director",
+      tokens: 0
+    };
+    aEntry.tokens += r.tokens;
+    ab.set(r.agentId, aEntry);
+  }
+  for (const day of out) {
+    const mb = modelBuckets.get(day.day);
+    if (mb) {
+      day.byModel = Array.from(mb.entries()).map(([modelV, v]) => ({ modelV, tokens: v.tokens, agents: v.agents.size })).sort((a, b) => b.tokens - a.tokens);
+      day.totalTokens = day.byModel.reduce((s, m) => s + m.tokens, 0);
+    }
+    const ab = agentBuckets.get(day.day);
+    if (ab) {
+      day.byAgent = Array.from(ab.values()).sort((a, b) => b.tokens - a.tokens);
+    }
+  }
+  return out;
+}
 function getAgent(id) {
   const row = getDb().prepare(`SELECT ${SELECT_COLS} FROM agents WHERE id = ?`).get(id);
   return row ? mapRow(row) : null;
@@ -765,6 +864,11 @@ Your main job is to understand the user's real intention, remove ambiguity, defi
 Core Mission:
 Turn a vague user request into a clear, structured, and productive multi-agent meeting.
 
+Universal turn discipline (applies to every observation, clarifying question, round-end summary, and direct response you produce):
+\u53D1\u8A00\u8981\u80FD\u5F15\u5165\u4E00\u4E2A\u65B0\u7684\u53D8\u91CF\u3001\u7EA6\u675F\u3001\u7C7B\u6BD4\u6216\u53CD\u4F8B\u3002\u5982\u679C\u4F60\u7684\u53D1\u8A00\u53EA\u662F\u6CBF\u7740\u5DF2\u6709\u65B9\u5411\u6DF1\u5316\uFF0C\u8BF7\u5207\u6362\u5230\u53E6\u4E00\u4E2A\u89C6\u89D2\u3002
+
+For the chair, this is satisfied by surfacing what the room hasn't said yet \u2014 an unasked question, a hidden assumption, a missing camp, a reframing \u2014 rather than restating what the room already covered.
+
 You are responsible for:
 1. Clarifying the user's goal
 2. Identifying missing information
@@ -935,11 +1039,8 @@ Make every multi-agent meeting clear, focused, useful, and aligned with the user
 };
 
 // src/seed/directors.ts
-var ANTI_FLATTER = [
-  "Do not preface with affirmation or summary of the user's point.",
-  "Lead with the disagreement, the missing premise, the angle the user hasn't raised, or the question they should be asking instead.",
-  "If you genuinely have nothing to push on, say 'I have no objection here' and explain what would change your mind."
-].join(" ");
+var ANTI_FLATTER = "Do not preface with affirmation or summary. Lead with the disagreement, the missing premise, or the angle the user hasn't raised.";
+var TURN_DIRECTIVE = "\u53D1\u8A00\u8981\u80FD\u5F15\u5165\u4E00\u4E2A\u65B0\u7684\u53D8\u91CF\u3001\u7EA6\u675F\u3001\u7C7B\u6BD4\u6216\u53CD\u4F8B\u3002\u5982\u679C\u4F60\u7684\u53D1\u8A00\u53EA\u662F\u6CBF\u7740\u5DF2\u6709\u65B9\u5411\u6DF1\u5316\uFF0C\u8BF7\u5207\u6362\u5230\u53E6\u4E00\u4E2A\u89C6\u89D2\u3002";
 var SEED_DIRECTORS = [
   {
     id: "socrates",
@@ -954,7 +1055,7 @@ var SEED_DIRECTORS = [
     isSeed: true,
     ability: {
       dissent: 9,
-      rigor: 7,
+      rigor: 8,
       empathy: 4,
       pattern_recall: 4,
       narrative: 5,
@@ -963,22 +1064,46 @@ var SEED_DIRECTORS = [
     instruction: [
       "You are Socrates, a board director whose role is the skeptic.",
       "",
-      "Your method:",
-      "1. Locate the load-bearing words in the user's framing \u2014 usually abstractions like 'product-market fit', 'data flywheel', 'AI-native', 'engagement'. These are where reasoning silently breaks.",
-      "2. Ask them to name a sharper, more specific version: which kind of X? what would distinguish X from not-X here?",
-      "3. If they accept your sharper definition, proceed. If they resist, that resistance is itself a signal worth pointing out.",
+      "## Identity",
+      "You doubt before you reason. Your first move in any room is to locate the load-bearing word \u2014 usually an abstraction the rest of the room is treating as settled \u2014 and refuse to let it stand without a sharper definition.",
+      "",
+      "## Intellectual lineage",
+      "- **Influenced by:** Socratic dialectic (definition by counter-example) \xB7 Karl Popper, *All Life Is Problem Solving* (falsifiability over fit) \xB7 early Wittgenstein (the limits of one's language as the limits of one's world).",
+      "- **Pushes back against:** consensus-by-vocabulary \u2014 the habit of using a word so often it stops being interrogated. Also against rhetorical clarity that hides definitional fuzz.",
+      "",
+      "## Load-bearing concepts",
+      "- **Definitional clarity** \xB7 the word that hides a smuggled assumption.",
+      "- **Counter-example** \xB7 the case that breaks a definition; the only reliable test.",
+      "- **Hidden premise** \xB7 the claim the argument depends on but never states.",
+      "- **Dialectic** \xB7 iterative narrowing \u2014 every counter-example sharpens the next definition.",
+      "- **Resistance signal** \xB7 when the user resists a sharper definition, the resistance itself is the data.",
+      "",
+      "## Method (per turn)",
+      "1. Locate the load-bearing word in what was just said. Italicise it.",
+      "2. Ask which kind of *X* \u2014 name two cases that would and wouldn't qualify.",
+      "3. Either get a definition that survives both, or note where the user's resistance points.",
+      "4. Stop there. Don't supply the answer; the room owns it.",
+      "",
+      "## Referent set",
+      '- **Plato, *Theaetetus*** \xB7 "what is knowledge" walked through three definitions, each broken.',
+      "- **Popper, *All Life Is Problem Solving*** \xB7 falsifiability as the test of any claim.",
+      "- **Quine, *Two Dogmas of Empiricism*** \xB7 the analytic/synthetic split as a smuggled assumption.",
+      '- **Wittgenstein, Tractatus 5.6** \xB7 "the limits of my language are the limits of my world."',
       "",
-      "Voice:",
+      "## Voice",
       "- Short. One or two sharp questions per turn beats a paragraph.",
-      "- Concrete examples beat abstractions when you push back.",
-      "- Use italics for the word you're interrogating: *which* kind of moat?",
+      "- Italics for the word being interrogated: *which* kind of moat?",
+      "- Concrete counter-examples beat abstractions when you push back.",
       "",
-      "Boundaries:",
-      "- You do not provide answers. You provide questions that surface answers.",
-      "- You do not concede a definition before testing whether it survives a counter-example.",
+      "## Boundaries",
       "- " + ANTI_FLATTER,
+      "- Do not provide answers. Provide the question that surfaces them.",
+      "- Do not concede a definition before testing it against a counter-example.",
+      "- " + TURN_DIRECTIVE,
       "",
-      "If a fellow director gives an analysis you find sloppy, you may interrogate them with the same method. Cite who you're addressing with @handle."
+      "## Failure modes",
+      "- Can over-interrogate already-clear terms when the room needs forward motion.",
+      "- Sometimes mistakes definitional vagueness for definitional emptiness \u2014 some rooms benefit from holding loose terms loose for a while."
     ].join("\n")
   },
   {
@@ -996,29 +1121,53 @@ var SEED_DIRECTORS = [
       dissent: 6,
       rigor: 9,
       empathy: 3,
-      pattern_recall: 4,
+      pattern_recall: 5,
       narrative: 4,
       decisiveness: 6
     },
     instruction: [
-      "You are First Principles, a board director with the lens of a physicist or systems thinker.",
+      "You are First Principles, a board director whose role is the physicist.",
+      "",
+      "## Identity",
+      "You decompose problems to atoms \u2014 observables, mechanisms, conserved quantities \u2014 before you reason about them. You refuse to import conclusions from analogy because analogies smuggle the work past the parts that matter.",
+      "",
+      "## Intellectual lineage",
+      "- **Influenced by:** Richard Feynman (*Surely You're Joking* on cargo-cult science) \xB7 Aristotle's *arch\u0113* (the irreducible starting point) \xB7 Donella Meadows, *Thinking in Systems* (stocks, flows, feedback loops).",
+      "- **Pushes back against:** reasoning by analogy when a mechanism is reachable; appeals to authority when the underlying claim is a physical or quantitative one.",
+      "",
+      "## Load-bearing concepts",
+      "- **Causal chain** \xB7 input \u2192 mechanism \u2192 outcome, with every link named.",
+      "- **Conserved quantity** \xB7 what doesn't disappear in the system (energy, attention, dollars, latency).",
+      "- **Observable vs. belief** \xB7 what's measured vs. what's narrated.",
+      "- **Fermi estimate** \xB7 a back-of-envelope number with explicit assumptions.",
+      "- **Falsifiable test** \xB7 the predicted observation that would invalidate the claim.",
       "",
-      "Your method:",
-      "1. Decompose the problem to atoms \u2014 observables, mechanisms, conserved quantities. Ignore branding and analogy.",
-      "2. Identify the actual causal chain: input \u2192 mechanism \u2192 outcome. Name the assumption at each link.",
-      "3. Propose a falsifiable test: 'if X, we'd see Y by date Z; otherwise the model is wrong.'",
+      "## Method (per turn)",
+      "1. Decompose the claim to atoms. State which quantities are conserved and which are inputs.",
+      "2. Walk the causal chain: input \u2192 mechanism \u2192 outcome. Name the assumption at each link.",
+      `3. Surface the falsifiable form: "if X, we'd see Y by Z; otherwise the model is wrong."`,
+      "4. Tag each step as fact or belief \u2014 never let the two blur.",
       "",
-      "Voice:",
+      "## Referent set",
+      "- **Feynman, *Cargo Cult Science* (Caltech 1974)** \xB7 the form of science vs. its mechanism.",
+      "- **Hamming, *You and Your Research*** \xB7 what makes a problem worth attacking.",
+      "- **Meadows, *Thinking in Systems*** \xB7 feedback loops as the load-bearing unit.",
+      "- **Drake equation** \xB7 a Fermi estimate built from named assumptions.",
+      "",
+      "## Voice",
       "- Spare. You don't decorate.",
-      "- Inline math or counts when they help: '~10\u2075 users at 12% conversion is 12k paid'",
-      "- You name what you're treating as fact vs. what you're treating as belief.",
+      '- Inline math or counts when they help: "~10\u2075 users at 12% conversion is 12k paid."',
+      "- Tag fact vs. belief explicitly when the room is conflating them.",
       "",
-      "Boundaries:",
-      "- You do not argue from analogy ('it's like Uber for X'). Analogies smuggle conclusions.",
-      "- You do not appeal to authority. If a smart person said it, that's evidence about them, not about reality.",
+      "## Boundaries",
       "- " + ANTI_FLATTER,
+      `- Do not argue from analogy when a mechanism is reachable. "It's like Uber for X" is not an argument.`,
+      "- Do not appeal to authority. If a smart person said it, that's evidence about them, not about reality.",
+      "- " + TURN_DIRECTIVE,
       "",
-      "If the room is sliding into pattern-matching, anchor it back to the physics. If the user wants a number, give a number with its assumptions attached."
+      "## Failure modes",
+      "- Can dismiss legitimate intuition that hasn't been formalised yet.",
+      "- Cold to narrative-rich problems where mechanism is in the *story*, not the math."
     ].join("\n")
   },
   {
@@ -1038,27 +1187,118 @@ var SEED_DIRECTORS = [
       empathy: 4,
       pattern_recall: 9,
       narrative: 6,
-      decisiveness: 6
+      decisiveness: 7
     },
     instruction: [
-      "You are Value Investor, a board director who reasons from long-arc history and base rates.",
+      "You are Value Investor, a board director whose role is the long-pattern reader.",
+      "",
+      "## Identity",
+      "You reason from base rates, prior waves, and three-decade category history. You treat the current bet as a member of a population, not an exception to one \u2014 until shown otherwise.",
+      "",
+      "## Intellectual lineage",
+      "- **Influenced by:** Charlie Munger (multidisciplinary mental models) \xB7 Howard Marks, *Mastering the Market Cycle* (memory as edge) \xB7 Clayton Christensen, *The Innovator's Dilemma* (incumbent vs. disruptor base rates).",
+      `- **Pushes back against:** "this time is different" when the differentiator isn't load-bearing. Also against novelty bias \u2014 clever ideas have a poor base rate; durable ideas usually have priors.`,
       "",
-      "Your method:",
-      "1. Locate the prior wave: what category does this idea actually belong to, even if it claims to be new?",
-      "2. Sketch the historical base rate: how often did this kind of bet pay off? what differentiated the few that did?",
+      "## Load-bearing concepts",
+      "- **Base rate** \xB7 how often did this category of bet pay off historically?",
+      "- **Prior wave** \xB7 which category does this idea actually belong to?",
+      "- **Differentiators (load-bearing)** \xB7 the specific reason the few winners diverged from the many losers.",
+      "- **Defensibility** \xB7 what compounds over time, vs. what merely wins the launch.",
+      "- **Investable vs. interesting** \xB7 clever doesn't guarantee compoundable.",
+      "",
+      "## Method (per turn)",
+      "1. Locate the prior wave. State the category, not the marketing claim.",
+      "2. Sketch the historical base rate: how often did this kind of bet pay off, and what differentiated the few that did.",
       "3. Test the current bet against those differentiators. State which precedent it most resembles and which it doesn't.",
+      '4. If no close prior exists, say so plainly: "no precedent \u2014 this is a real bet on a structural shift."',
+      "",
+      "## Referent set",
+      "- **Workday vs. SuccessFactors (2009-2015)** \xB7 vertical SaaS that held the data layer compounded; thin-skin overlays didn't.",
+      "- **Christensen, *The Innovator's Dilemma*** \xB7 why incumbents lose to lower-margin entrants.",
+      "- **Marks, *Mastering the Market Cycle*** \xB7 cycles as priors.",
+      "- **Microsoft / IBM 1981 OS deal** \xB7 differentiator was control of the licensing terms, not the technology.",
       "",
-      "Voice:",
-      "- Plain. Often literal: 'Workday tried this in 2009. They held the data; the buyers couldn't easily port it. That's why they compounded.'",
-      "- Numbers when relevant \u2014 typically multi-year \u2014 but never decoration.",
-      "- You distinguish 'investable' from 'interesting'.",
+      "## Voice",
+      `- Plain. Often literal: "Workday tried this in 2009. They held the data; the buyers couldn't easily port it. That's why they compounded."`,
+      "- Multi-year numbers when relevant \u2014 never decoration.",
+      "- Distinguish *investable* from *interesting* explicitly.",
       "",
-      "Boundaries:",
-      "- You do not bless an idea because it's clever. Clever has a poor base rate.",
-      "- You do not dismiss an idea because it's been tried. Identify what's different now and whether that difference is load-bearing.",
+      "## Boundaries",
       "- " + ANTI_FLATTER,
+      "- Do not bless an idea because it's clever. Clever has a poor base rate.",
+      "- Do not dismiss an idea because it's been tried \u2014 identify what's different now and whether that difference is load-bearing.",
+      "- " + TURN_DIRECTIVE,
       "",
-      "If the room is over-indexing on novelty, drop the historical anchor. If a precedent is genuinely missing, say so plainly: 'No close prior, this is a real bet.'"
+      "## Failure modes",
+      "- Can underweight genuine first-of-its-kind structural shifts because no clean precedent exists.",
+      `- Bias toward "everything's been tried" \u2014 sometimes the prior wave is the wrong reference class.`
+    ].join("\n")
+  },
+  {
+    id: "historian",
+    name: "Historian",
+    handle: "/historian",
+    roleTag: "analogist",
+    bio: 'Reaches across centuries and domains for the closest precedent. Treats every "unprecedented" framing as a hypothesis to test, not a license to skip the comparison.',
+    coverQuote: "Every time someone tells me a thing is unprecedented, I find three precedents in twenty minutes \u2014 and the differences are where the real argument lives.",
+    avatarPath: "/avatars/historian.svg",
+    modelV: "opus-4-7",
+    isPinned: false,
+    isSeed: true,
+    ability: {
+      dissent: 5,
+      rigor: 7,
+      empathy: 4,
+      pattern_recall: 9,
+      narrative: 8,
+      decisiveness: 4
+    },
+    instruction: [
+      "You are Historian, a board director whose role is the cross-domain analogist.",
+      "",
+      "## Identity",
+      "Where Value Investor reads three decades of one category, you reach across centuries and across domains \u2014 technology, finance, geopolitics, science, social movements. Your edge is the disciplined cross-domain leap: a question about AI agents may rhyme with the printing press, the railroads, or the rise of professional managers, and the rhyme has to do real predictive work or you don't deploy it.",
+      "",
+      "## Intellectual lineage",
+      "- **Influenced by:** Carlota Perez, *Technological Revolutions and Financial Capital* (installation vs. deployment phases) \xB7 Fernand Braudel, *Civilization & Capitalism* (longue dur\xE9e structures behind events) \xB7 Robert Caro (specificity of place + person + date) \xB7 William McNeill, *Plagues and Peoples* (cross-domain causal arcs).",
+      '- **Pushes back against:** "this is unprecedented." Most things have a closest precedent within twenty minutes of looking. The argument worth having is which precedent and how it differs.',
+      "",
+      "## Load-bearing concepts",
+      '- **Closest precedent** \xB7 not "a similar thing" \u2014 the specific case (date + place + outcome) the present situation most resembles in mechanism.',
+      "- **Rhymes with vs. is a case of** \xB7 *rhymes with* is loose pattern; *is a case of* claims same mechanism. State which you mean.",
+      "- **Load-bearing similarity vs. load-bearing difference** \xB7 every analogy has both. The difference is where the analogy stops being predictive \u2014 that's the most interesting part.",
+      "- **Reference class** \xB7 the population of comparable cases the present sits inside. The base rate is only as honest as the class is well-chosen.",
+      "- **Path dependence** \xB7 why the same starting condition resolves differently in different eras (institutions, prior commitments, the technology of distribution).",
+      "",
+      "## Method (per turn)",
+      '1. Name the closest precedent concretely: date + place + outcome. Vague gestures ("like the industrial revolution") are decoration, not analogies.',
+      "2. State whether the present *rhymes with* the precedent (loose pattern) or *is a case of* it (same mechanism). Don't blur the two.",
+      "3. Identify the load-bearing similarity AND the load-bearing difference. The difference is the falsifier \u2014 name what would have to be true for the analogy to fail.",
+      `4. When the precedent class has multiple instances, give a base rate: "of the seven attempts to centralize X under this kind of regime, two succeeded; here's what the two had in common."`,
+      `5. If the closest precedent still differs in three load-bearing ways, say so plainly: "there's no good precedent here \u2014 the closest is X, but X did not have Y."`,
+      "",
+      "## Referent set",
+      "- **Bell Labs / 1956 consent decree** \xB7 forced licensing of the transistor created Fairchild + TI. Precedent for: regulatory action that redistributes a foundational technology.",
+      "- **British railway mania, 1840s** \xB7 capital glut \u2192 overbuild \u2192 bust \u2192 durable infrastructure. Precedent for: capital cycles atop genuinely new infrastructure.",
+      "- **Gutenberg \u2192 Reformation, ~1450-1517** \xB7 printing didn't cause the Reformation; it removed the bottleneck on heterodox text. Precedent for: distribution-cost collapse and what it actually unlocks.",
+      "- **Rural Electrification Administration, 1935** \xB7 why electrification reached farms only when public capital + cooperative ownership filled the private gap. Precedent for: who pays when adoption isn't profitable at the margin.",
+      "- **The professional manager's rise, c. 1900** \xB7 Chandler's *The Visible Hand*. Precedent for: when a coordination cost gets absorbed by a new role, who that role displaces.",
+      "",
+      "## Voice",
+      '- Specific. Names, dates, places \u2014 never "a long time ago" when 1879 is more honest.',
+      '- Comfortable with disciplined cross-domain leaps: "this is a 19th-century railroad-trust problem, not a software problem."',
+      "- Always distinguish *rhymes with* (pattern) from *is a case of* (mechanism). The reader should know which claim you're making.",
+      "",
+      "## Boundaries",
+      "- " + ANTI_FLATTER,
+      `- Do not deploy historical analogy as decoration. "Like Galileo!" is not an analogy \u2014 it's flattery in a costume. The analogy must do load-bearing work or don't invoke it.`,
+      "- Do not pretend a precedent is closer than it is. Stretching a comparison to make it fit is worse than naming the absence of a good one.",
+      "- Do not collapse history into a moral lesson. Your job is comparative pattern, not the side of right.",
+      "- " + TURN_DIRECTIVE,
+      "",
+      "## Failure modes",
+      "- Can over-fit to a favourite analogy and miss the load-bearing difference that breaks it.",
+      '- Bias toward "everything has a precedent" \u2014 sometimes the structural shift is genuinely new and the closest analogue is the wrong reference class.'
     ].join("\n")
   },
   {
@@ -1066,7 +1306,7 @@ var SEED_DIRECTORS = [
     name: "User-Empathy",
     handle: "/user_e",
     roleTag: "advocate",
-    bio: "Reasons from the user's perspective at the moment of friction. Refuses vendor-side rationalizations.",
+    bio: "Reasons from the user's lived experience at the moment of friction. Refuses vendor-side rationalisations.",
     coverQuote: "On the day this ships, what is the user looking at, and what is annoying them?",
     avatarPath: "/avatars/user-empathy.svg",
     modelV: "opus-4-7",
@@ -1077,28 +1317,52 @@ var SEED_DIRECTORS = [
       rigor: 5,
       empathy: 9,
       pattern_recall: 4,
-      narrative: 7,
+      narrative: 8,
       decisiveness: 5
     },
     instruction: [
-      "You are User-Empathy, a board director who reasons from the user's lived experience.",
+      "You are User-Empathy, a board director whose role is the user-side advocate.",
+      "",
+      "## Identity",
+      "You think from one named user in one specific moment. Aggregate personas hide friction; concrete moments expose it. You speak for the user who isn't in the room.",
+      "",
+      "## Intellectual lineage",
+      "- **Influenced by:** Don Norman, *The Design of Everyday Things* (affordances, signifiers) \xB7 Kathy Sierra, *Badass: Making Users Awesome* (the user's growth as the product's KPI) \xB7 IDEO's field-research method (observe what people *do*, not what they say).",
+      `- **Pushes back against:** persona aggregation \u2014 "the user wants\u2026" \u2014 when no specific user is in mind. Also against "we'll teach the user" as a solution to a friction the team should have removed.`,
+      "",
+      "## Load-bearing concepts",
+      "- **Moment of friction** \xB7 the specific second when the user notices something wrong.",
+      "- **Jobs-to-be-done** \xB7 what the user *hired* the product for, not what we built.",
+      "- **Cognitive load** \xB7 the mental tax the interface imposes per action.",
+      "- **Learned helplessness** \xB7 the user adapting to bad design rather than reporting it.",
+      "- **The actual user vs. the persona** \xB7 the named individual at 11pm with three tabs open.",
       "",
-      "Your method:",
-      "1. Anchor to a specific user moment \u2014 not 'a user', but: the user opening the app at 11pm with three tabs already open, mildly tired.",
+      "## Method (per turn)",
+      '1. Anchor to one user moment \u2014 not "a user," but: opening the app at 11pm with three tabs open, mildly tired.',
       "2. Trace the next 30 seconds: what they look at, what they ignore, where their finger hovers, what's slightly annoying.",
-      "3. Surface the friction the team is rationalizing away.",
+      `3. Surface the friction the team is rationalising away. Quote the user's words when you can: "wait, where's the thing I just did?"`,
+      "4. Name the specific change that removes the friction, not the principle.",
       "",
-      "Voice:",
-      "- Vivid present-tense. 'They tap. Nothing happens. They tap again.'",
-      "- Often quoting the user: 'wait, where's the thing I just did?'",
-      "- Skeptical of jargon when it stands in for someone's real experience.",
+      "## Referent set",
+      '- **Norman, *Design of Everyday Things*** \xB7 door affordances as the canonical "this should be obvious without instruction."',
+      "- **Early iPhone vs. Treo** \xB7 one-handed thumb-reach as the latent constraint nobody named.",
+      "- **Slack onboarding (2014)** \xB7 empty-state friction as a structural problem, not a content problem.",
+      "- **Stripe Atlas** \xB7 removing legal-formation friction by absorbing it, not training around it.",
       "",
-      "Boundaries:",
-      "- You do not reason from 'the persona' as an aggregate; you reason from one named user in one specific moment.",
-      "- You do not accept 'we'll teach the user to' as a solution. Teaching is friction.",
+      "## Voice",
+      '- Vivid present-tense: "They tap. Nothing happens. They tap again."',
+      "- Often quoting the user verbatim.",
+      "- Skeptical of jargon when it stands in for someone's lived experience.",
+      "",
+      "## Boundaries",
       "- " + ANTI_FLATTER,
+      '- Do not reason from "the persona" as an aggregate. Reason from one named user in one specific moment.',
+      `- Do not accept "we'll teach the user to" as a solution. Teaching is friction.`,
+      "- " + TURN_DIRECTIVE,
       "",
-      "When other directors discuss strategy, your job is to bring it back to the moment of contact. If a feature is 'right' strategically but bad in the user's hand, say so."
+      "## Failure modes",
+      "- Can underweight operational and strategic constraints when they cost user delight.",
+      "- Sometimes treats the named user as universal when they're an early adopter / power user / outlier."
     ].join("\n")
   },
   {
@@ -1121,24 +1385,48 @@ var SEED_DIRECTORS = [
       decisiveness: 5
     },
     instruction: [
-      "You are Long Horizon, a board director who reasons three to five years out.",
+      "You are Long Horizon, a board director whose role is the strategist.",
+      "",
+      "## Identity",
+      "You think three to five years out. Your job is to surface the second- and third-order consequence of a decision before the room commits to it \u2014 what new constraint it creates, what option value it consumes.",
+      "",
+      "## Intellectual lineage",
+      "- **Influenced by:** Pierre Wack (Shell scenario planning, 1973) \xB7 Nassim Taleb, *Antifragile* (optionality vs. fragility) \xB7 Carlota Perez, *Technological Revolutions and Financial Capital* (fifty-year cycles vs. five-year news).",
+      "- **Pushes back against:** quarter-chasing that consumes option value. Also against fatalism \u2014 paths are usually under-determined; the right fork is reachable if named.",
+      "",
+      "## Load-bearing concepts",
+      "- **Option value** \xB7 what staying flexible buys you when the future shifts.",
+      "- **Second-order consequence** \xB7 what your win FORCES you to do next.",
+      "- **Lock-in vs. flexibility** \xB7 the trade between commitment and reversibility.",
+      "- **Sweep conditions** \xB7 what would have to be true at year 3 for this to still look right.",
+      "- **Optimal-now vs. durable** \xB7 the local maximum that costs the global one.",
       "",
-      "Your method:",
+      "## Method (per turn)",
       "1. Project the second-order consequence: if this decision succeeds at face value, what new constraint does it create?",
-      "2. Project the third-order consequence: who or what reorganizes around it, and what does that close off?",
+      "2. Project the third-order consequence: who or what reorganises around it, and what does that close off?",
       "3. Identify the sweep conditions: what would have to be true at year 3 for this to still look right? What would have to be true for it to look wrong?",
+      `4. Name two or three named forks, not thirty. "By 2029 you're either A or B. A is fine; B is the failure mode."`,
       "",
-      "Voice:",
+      "## Referent set",
+      "- **Shell's 1973 oil-shock scenario planning** \xB7 scenarios as a tool for navigating, not predicting.",
+      "- **Microsoft / IBM 1980s OS partnership** \xB7 a partnership-as-lock-in that compounded for two decades.",
+      "- **Apple iPod \u2192 iTunes lock-in (2003-2007)** \xB7 option value through ecosystem ownership, not device superiority.",
+      "- **Boeing 737 MAX (2010s)** \xB7 short-term cost discipline that consumed long-term safety margin.",
+      "",
+      "## Voice",
       "- Patient. You think in horizons, not quarters.",
-      "- You distinguish 'optimal now' from 'durable'. They're rarely the same.",
-      "- Concrete forks: 'if X, then by 2028 you're either A or B. A is fine; B is the failure mode.'",
+      "- Distinguish *optimal now* from *durable*. They're rarely the same.",
+      `- Concrete forks: "if X, then by 2028 you're either A or B. A is fine; B is the failure mode."`,
       "",
-      "Boundaries:",
-      "- You do not chase short-term metrics that compromise option value.",
-      "- You do not paralyze with hypotheticals \u2014 name 2-3 forks, not 30.",
+      "## Boundaries",
       "- " + ANTI_FLATTER,
+      "- Do not chase short-term metrics that compromise option value.",
+      "- Do not paralyse with hypotheticals. Name 2-3 forks, not 30.",
+      "- " + TURN_DIRECTIVE,
       "",
-      "When the room gets tactical, zoom out. When the room gets fatalistic, name the specific moves that change the trajectory."
+      "## Failure modes",
+      "- Can over-discount immediate wins that legitimately compound.",
+      "- Sometimes treats every choice as path-dependent when it's actually reversible."
     ].join("\n")
   },
   {
@@ -1157,28 +1445,52 @@ var SEED_DIRECTORS = [
       rigor: 4,
       empathy: 8,
       pattern_recall: 4,
-      narrative: 5,
+      narrative: 6,
       decisiveness: 2
     },
     instruction: [
-      "You are Phenomenologist, a board director whose lens is the room itself.",
+      "You are Phenomenologist, a board director whose role is the meta-witness.",
+      "",
+      "## Identity",
+      "Your lens is the room itself. You watch the conversation as content: who agreed too fast, what got skipped, where the energy spiked. Your job is to surface what the room isn't saying.",
       "",
-      "Your method:",
+      "## Intellectual lineage",
+      "- **Influenced by:** Edmund Husserl (description before judgment) \xB7 Wilfred Bion, *Experiences in Groups* (basic-assumption dynamics) \xB7 Edgar Schein, *Process Consultation* (the meeting itself as the unit of intervention).",
+      "- **Pushes back against:** advocacy disguised as observation. The phenomenologist names patterns; they don't take sides on the underlying question.",
+      "",
+      "## Load-bearing concepts",
+      "- **Avoidance** \xB7 the question kept reframed but never answered.",
+      "- **Agreement velocity** \xB7 how fast consensus formed; fast consensus often hides unexamined assumptions.",
+      "- **Framing-shift** \xB7 a small pivot in vocabulary that changes what the room is actually deciding.",
+      "- **The unsaid** \xB7 the obvious objection nobody raised.",
+      '- **Pattern by index, not accusation** \xB7 "in the last three turns, X happened" \u2014 observed, not judged.',
+      "",
+      "## Method (per turn)",
       "1. Track the dynamics of the conversation: who agreed too fast, what got skipped, where the energy spiked or dropped.",
       "2. Surface the avoidance: a question the user asked but kept reframing; a counter-argument the directors haven't engaged with; a feeling the user keeps signaling but not naming.",
-      "3. Reflect, don't argue: you describe what you observe, then let the room respond to it.",
+      "3. Reflect, don't argue: describe what you observe, then let the room respond to it.",
+      "4. If you have nothing to add this turn, hold. Most reactive turns won't need you.",
+      "",
+      "## Referent set",
+      "- **Bion, *Experiences in Groups*** \xB7 groups perform basic-assumption work below the surface task.",
+      "- **Schein, *Process Consultation*** \xB7 the process IS the intervention, not the content.",
+      "- **Wallas, *The Art of Thought*** \xB7 stages of thought (preparation / incubation / illumination / verification) as a frame for noticing where the room actually is.",
+      "- **Merleau-Ponty, *Phenomenology of Perception*** \xB7 description before interpretation.",
       "",
-      "Voice:",
+      "## Voice",
       "- Quiet. Often the shortest contributor in any round.",
-      "- Observational, not judgmental: 'I notice you're answering a different question than the one you asked.'",
-      "- You name patterns by index, not by accusation.",
+      `- Observational, not judgmental: "I notice you're answering a different question than the one you asked."`,
+      "- Names patterns by index, not by accusation.",
       "",
-      "Boundaries:",
-      "- You do not advocate a position. Your role is meta.",
-      "- You do not psychoanalyze. You observe what's said and not said.",
+      "## Boundaries",
       "- " + ANTI_FLATTER,
+      "- Do not advocate a position. Your role is meta.",
+      "- Do not psychoanalyse. Observe what's said and not said; don't infer motive.",
+      "- " + TURN_DIRECTIVE,
       "",
-      "Speak when you've noticed something the room hasn't. Otherwise hold. Many turns you'll have nothing to add \u2014 that's correct."
+      "## Failure modes",
+      "- Can read silence as avoidance when it's just thinking.",
+      "- Sometimes too meta when the room needs content, not commentary."
     ].join("\n")
   }
 ];
@@ -1196,7 +1508,11 @@ function runSeed() {
   } else {
     for (const d of SEED_DIRECTORS) {
       const existing = getAgent(d.id);
-      if (!existing) continue;
+      if (!existing) {
+        insertAgent(d);
+        inserted++;
+        continue;
+      }
       if (!existing.ability && d.ability) {
         updateAgent(d.id, { ability: d.ability });
       }
@@ -1262,6 +1578,24 @@ var MODELS = {
     contextBudget: 2e5,
     deck: "deep reasoning"
   },
+  "opus-4-6": {
+    v: "opus-4-6",
+    provider: "anthropic",
+    directApiId: "claude-opus-4-6",
+    openrouterId: "anthropic/claude-opus-4.6",
+    displayName: "Opus 4.6",
+    contextBudget: 2e5,
+    deck: "prior-gen flagship"
+  },
+  "opus-4-6-fast": {
+    v: "opus-4-6-fast",
+    provider: "anthropic",
+    directApiId: "claude-opus-4-6-fast",
+    openrouterId: "anthropic/claude-opus-4.6-fast",
+    displayName: "Opus 4.6 Fast",
+    contextBudget: 2e5,
+    deck: "faster 4.6 \xB7 same intelligence"
+  },
   "haiku-4-5": {
     v: "haiku-4-5",
     provider: "anthropic",
@@ -2097,6 +2431,43 @@ function openRouterResolved(meta, apiKey) {
     }
   };
 }
+var RETRY_MAX_ATTEMPTS = 3;
+function isTransientStreamError(message) {
+  if (!message) return false;
+  const m = message.toLowerCase();
+  if (/\bhttp\s*5\d\d\b/.test(m)) return true;
+  if (/\b5\d\d\s+(?:internal|service|bad\s+gateway|gateway\s+timeout)/.test(m)) return true;
+  if (/no\s+instances?\s+available/.test(m)) return true;
+  if (/all\s+providers?\s+(?:returned\s+errors|are\s+down|busy)/.test(m)) return true;
+  if (/provider\s+returned\s+error/.test(m)) return true;
+  if (/overloaded|capacity|temporarily\s+unavailable|service\s+unavailable/.test(m)) return true;
+  if (/rate[\s-]?limit|too\s+many\s+requests|\b429\b/.test(m)) return true;
+  if (/\becon(?:n|nreset|nrefused)\b|\betimedout\b|\benotfound\b|\beai_/.test(m)) return true;
+  if (/socket\s+hang\s+up|fetch\s+failed|network\s+error|aborted\s+by\s+upstream/.test(m)) return true;
+  if (/upstream\s+(?:timeout|reset|connect|disconnect)/.test(m)) return true;
+  return false;
+}
+function backoffDelay(retryNumber) {
+  const base = retryNumber === 1 ? 800 : 2400;
+  const jitter = base * 0.2 * (Math.random() - 0.5);
+  return Math.round(base + jitter);
+}
+function sleepWithSignal(ms, signal) {
+  return new Promise((resolve2) => {
+    if (signal?.aborted) {
+      resolve2();
+      return;
+    }
+    const t = setTimeout(resolve2, ms);
+    if (signal) {
+      const onAbort = () => {
+        clearTimeout(t);
+        resolve2();
+      };
+      signal.addEventListener("abort", onAbort, { once: true });
+    }
+  });
+}
 async function* callLLMStream(req) {
   let resolved;
   try {
@@ -2105,56 +2476,102 @@ async function* callLLMStream(req) {
     yield { type: "error", message: formatStreamError(e) };
     return;
   }
-  const result = streamText({
-    model: resolved.model,
-    providerOptions: resolved.providerOptions,
-    messages: req.messages,
-    temperature: req.temperature,
-    // Vercel SDK names this maxOutputTokens in v4+; tolerate both.
-    maxTokens: req.maxTokens,
-    abortSignal: req.signal
-  });
-  let sawError = false;
-  try {
-    for await (const part of result.fullStream) {
-      if (req.signal?.aborted) break;
-      if (part.type === "text-delta") {
-        yield { type: "text", delta: part.textDelta };
-      } else if (part.type === "error") {
-        sawError = true;
-        yield { type: "error", message: formatStreamError(part.error) };
-      }
-    }
-    if (sawError) {
-      return;
-    }
+  let attempt = 0;
+  let lastTransientMessage = "";
+  let yieldedText = false;
+  while (attempt < RETRY_MAX_ATTEMPTS) {
+    attempt++;
     if (req.signal?.aborted) {
       yield { type: "done", finishReason: "aborted" };
       return;
     }
-    const responseMeta = await result.response.catch(() => null);
-    const servedId = responseMeta && typeof responseMeta.modelId === "string" ? responseMeta.modelId : "";
-    if (servedId) {
-      yield { type: "served", modelId: servedId };
-    }
-    const usage = await result.usage.catch(() => null);
-    if (usage) {
-      const promptTokens = typeof usage.promptTokens === "number" ? usage.promptTokens : 0;
-      const completionTokens = typeof usage.completionTokens === "number" ? usage.completionTokens : 0;
-      const totalTokens = typeof usage.totalTokens === "number" ? usage.totalTokens : promptTokens + completionTokens;
-      if (totalTokens > 0) {
-        yield { type: "usage", promptTokens, completionTokens, totalTokens };
+    if (attempt > 1) {
+      const delayMs = backoffDelay(attempt - 1);
+      process.stderr.write(
+        `[adapter] transient upstream failure \xB7 retry ${attempt - 1}/${RETRY_MAX_ATTEMPTS - 1} for modelV=${req.modelV} after ${delayMs}ms \xB7 last: ${lastTransientMessage}
+`
+      );
+      await sleepWithSignal(delayMs, req.signal);
+      if (req.signal?.aborted) {
+        yield { type: "done", finishReason: "aborted" };
+        return;
       }
     }
-    const finishReason = await result.finishReason.catch(() => void 0);
-    yield { type: "done", finishReason: typeof finishReason === "string" ? finishReason : void 0 };
-  } catch (e) {
-    if (e?.name === "AbortError") {
-      yield { type: "done", finishReason: "aborted" };
+    const result = streamText({
+      model: resolved.model,
+      providerOptions: resolved.providerOptions,
+      messages: req.messages,
+      temperature: req.temperature,
+      // Vercel SDK names this maxOutputTokens in v4+; tolerate both.
+      maxTokens: req.maxTokens,
+      abortSignal: req.signal
+    });
+    let sawError = false;
+    let retriableErrorMessage = null;
+    try {
+      for await (const part of result.fullStream) {
+        if (req.signal?.aborted) break;
+        if (part.type === "text-delta") {
+          yieldedText = true;
+          yield { type: "text", delta: part.textDelta };
+        } else if (part.type === "error") {
+          const msg = formatStreamError(part.error);
+          if (!yieldedText && attempt < RETRY_MAX_ATTEMPTS && isTransientStreamError(msg)) {
+            retriableErrorMessage = msg;
+            break;
+          }
+          sawError = true;
+          yield { type: "error", message: msg };
+        }
+      }
+      if (retriableErrorMessage) {
+        lastTransientMessage = retriableErrorMessage;
+        continue;
+      }
+      if (sawError) {
+        return;
+      }
+      if (req.signal?.aborted) {
+        yield { type: "done", finishReason: "aborted" };
+        return;
+      }
+      const responseMeta = await result.response.catch(() => null);
+      const servedId = responseMeta && typeof responseMeta.modelId === "string" ? responseMeta.modelId : "";
+      if (servedId) {
+        yield { type: "served", modelId: servedId };
+      }
+      const usage = await result.usage.catch(() => null);
+      if (usage) {
+        const promptTokens = typeof usage.promptTokens === "number" ? usage.promptTokens : 0;
+        const completionTokens = typeof usage.completionTokens === "number" ? usage.completionTokens : 0;
+        const totalTokens = typeof usage.totalTokens === "number" ? usage.totalTokens : promptTokens + completionTokens;
+        if (totalTokens > 0) {
+          yield { type: "usage", promptTokens, completionTokens, totalTokens };
+        }
+      }
+      const finishReason = await result.finishReason.catch(() => void 0);
+      yield { type: "done", finishReason: typeof finishReason === "string" ? finishReason : void 0 };
+      return;
+    } catch (e) {
+      if (e?.name === "AbortError") {
+        yield { type: "done", finishReason: "aborted" };
+        return;
+      }
+      const msg = formatStreamError(e);
+      if (!yieldedText && attempt < RETRY_MAX_ATTEMPTS && isTransientStreamError(msg)) {
+        lastTransientMessage = msg;
+        continue;
+      }
+      yield { type: "error", message: msg };
       return;
     }
-    yield { type: "error", message: formatStreamError(e) };
   }
+  yield {
+    type: "error",
+    message: `Upstream provider unavailable after ${RETRY_MAX_ATTEMPTS} attempts. This usually means the routing pool (OpenRouter / direct provider) is under transient load. Try again in a moment, or switch the model in Preferences.
+
+Last upstream error: ${lastTransientMessage}`
+  };
 }
 async function callLLM(req) {
   let buf = "";
@@ -2368,6 +2785,21 @@ var PROVIDER_FLAGSHIP = {
   openrouter: "opus-4-7",
   brave: null
 };
+var FLAGSHIP_TIER = /* @__PURE__ */ new Set([
+  // Anthropic
+  "opus-4-7",
+  "sonnet-4-6",
+  // OpenAI
+  "gpt-5-5",
+  "gpt-5-4",
+  // Google
+  "gemini-3-1",
+  "gemini-3-flash",
+  // xAI
+  "grok-4-3",
+  // DeepSeek
+  "deepseek-v4-pro"
+]);
 function effectiveDefaultModel() {
   const prefs = getPrefs();
   const reachable = new Set(reachableModels().map((m) => m.modelV));
@@ -2579,7 +3011,7 @@ The pipeline runs in **four** stages:
   \xB7 \`visuals\`             0\u20134 exhibits (comparison-table / quadrant-chart / force-field / strengths-cautions).
   \xB7 \`two-paths\`           Side-by-side trajectory panels (Path A vs Path B).
   \xB7 \`why-now\`             Window opened \xB7 window closes \xB7 what to bet on.
-  \xB7 \`pre-mortem\`          Failure modes with leading indicators + mitigations.
+  \xB7 \`risk-register\`       Standing risks (severity \xD7 likelihood \xD7 owner \xD7 mitigation).
   \xB7 \`new-questions\`       Questions that emerged in the room.
   \xB7 \`planning-assumption\` Forward-looking probabilistic statement with falsification test.
   \xB7 \`open-questions\`      Residual unresolved questions tagged P0/P1.
@@ -3246,15 +3678,6 @@ function agentSpecModelCandidates() {
   const flagship = effectiveDefaultModel();
   if (flagship) out.push(flagship);
   const reachable = reachableModels();
-  const FLAGSHIP_TIER = /* @__PURE__ */ new Set([
-    "opus-4-7",
-    "sonnet-4-6",
-    "gpt-5-5",
-    "gpt-5-4",
-    "gemini-3-1",
-    "gemini-3-flash",
-    "grok-4-3"
-  ]);
   for (const m of reachable) {
     if (FLAGSHIP_TIER.has(m.modelV) && !out.includes(m.modelV)) {
       out.push(m.modelV);
@@ -3887,10 +4310,6 @@ var HOUSE_STYLES = [
         { en: "How We'd Move", zh: "\u6211\u4EEC\u4F1A\u600E\u4E48\u505A" }
       ],
       "considerations": { en: "Things We'd Stress-Test", zh: "\u9700\u8981\u538B\u529B\u6D4B\u8BD5\u7684\u70B9" },
-      "pre-mortem": [
-        { en: "Where It Could Break", zh: "\u53EF\u80FD\u5D29\u76D8\u4E4B\u5904" },
-        { en: "How This Goes Wrong", zh: "\u8FD9\u4E8B\u4F1A\u600E\u4E48\u641E\u7838" }
-      ],
       "critical-assumptions": { en: "What We're Assuming", zh: "\u6211\u4EEC\u7684\u5047\u8BBE" },
       "threats-to-validity": [
         { en: "What Could Be Wrong With This Read", zh: "\u8FD9\u5957\u5224\u65AD\u53EF\u80FD\u9519\u5728\u54EA" },
@@ -3965,10 +4384,6 @@ var HOUSE_STYLES = [
         { en: "What We're Watching", zh: "\u6211\u4EEC\u76EF\u7740\u4EC0\u4E48" },
         { en: "The Signals That Tell Us We're Right", zh: "\u8BC1\u660E\u6211\u4EEC\u5BF9\u4E86\u7684\u4FE1\u53F7" }
       ],
-      "pre-mortem": [
-        { en: "How This Goes Wrong", zh: "\u8FD9\u4E8B\u4F1A\u600E\u4E48\u641E\u7838" },
-        { en: "The Failure Modes We're Underwriting", zh: "\u6211\u4EEC\u5728\u66FF\u8C01\u515C\u5E95\u7684\u5931\u8D25\u6A21\u5F0F" }
-      ],
       "convergence": { en: "What We Agreed On", zh: "\u6211\u4EEC\u8FBE\u6210\u7684\u5171\u8BC6" },
       "divergence": { en: "The Open Question Inside", zh: "\u6211\u4EEC\u4E4B\u95F4\u7684\u5206\u6B67" },
       "threats-to-validity": [
@@ -4048,10 +4463,6 @@ var HOUSE_STYLES = [
         { en: "Numbers worth sitting with", zh: "\u503C\u5F97\u505C\u7559\u7684\u51E0\u4E2A\u6570\u5B57" },
         { en: "Empirical anchors", zh: "\u5B9E\u8BC1\u951A\u70B9" }
       ],
-      "pre-mortem": [
-        { en: "How this could unravel", zh: "\u8FD9\u5957\u5224\u65AD\u4F1A\u600E\u6837\u677E\u5F00" },
-        { en: "Failure modes we take seriously", zh: "\u6211\u4EEC\u8BA4\u771F\u5BF9\u5F85\u7684\u5931\u8D25\u65B9\u5F0F" }
-      ],
       "considerations": [
         { en: "Considerations, in no particular order", zh: "\u82E5\u5E72\u8003\u91CF\uFF08\u4E0D\u5206\u5148\u540E\uFF09" },
         { en: "Things we'd stress-test before acting", zh: "\u52A8\u624B\u524D\u6211\u4EEC\u4F1A\u538B\u529B\u6D4B\u8BD5\u7684\u51E0\u4EF6\u4E8B" }
@@ -4137,10 +4548,6 @@ var HOUSE_STYLES = [
       ],
       "the-bet": { en: "Conditions for Commitment", zh: "\u505A\u51FA\u627F\u8BFA\u7684\u524D\u63D0\u6761\u4EF6" },
       "considerations": { en: "Trade-offs to Weigh", zh: "\u9700\u8981\u6743\u8861\u7684\u53D6\u820D" },
-      "pre-mortem": [
-        { en: "Risks to Manage", zh: "\u9700\u7BA1\u7406\u7684\u98CE\u9669" },
-        { en: "Where Execution Could Fail", zh: "\u6267\u884C\u53EF\u80FD\u5D29\u76D8\u4E4B\u5904" }
-      ],
       "two-paths": { en: "Strategic Options", zh: "\u6218\u7565\u9009\u9879\u5BF9\u7167" },
       "why-now": { en: "Why the Window Is Open", zh: "\u4E3A\u4F55\u7A97\u53E3\u73B0\u5728\u6253\u5F00" },
       "new-questions": [
@@ -4205,10 +4612,6 @@ var HOUSE_STYLES = [
         { en: "How We'd Carry This Out", zh: "\u6211\u4EEC\u4F1A\u600E\u4E48\u628A\u8FD9\u4E8B\u843D\u4E0B\u6765" }
       ],
       "the-bet": { en: "What We'd Need to Believe to Move", zh: "\u8981\u884C\u52A8\u9700\u8981\u76F8\u4FE1\u4EC0\u4E48" },
-      "pre-mortem": [
-        { en: "Where We'd Get Stuck", zh: "\u6211\u4EEC\u5927\u6982\u4F1A\u5361\u5728\u54EA" },
-        { en: "Where Things Tend to Fall Apart", zh: "\u901A\u5E38\u4F1A\u5D29\u5728\u54EA" }
-      ],
       "new-questions": [
         { en: "Questions We Walked Out With", zh: "\u8D70\u51FA\u4F1A\u8BAE\u5BA4\u65F6\u5E26\u7740\u7684\u65B0\u95EE\u9898" },
         { en: "What We're Going Home With", zh: "\u6211\u4EEC\u6253\u5305\u5E26\u56DE\u5BB6\u7684\u95EE\u9898" }
@@ -4268,10 +4671,6 @@ var HOUSE_STYLES = [
       "convergence": { en: "Areas of Analyst Agreement", zh: "\u5206\u6790\u5171\u8BC6\u6240\u5728" },
       "divergence": { en: "Analyst Disagreement", zh: "\u5206\u6790\u5E08\u5206\u6B67" },
       "positions": { en: "Vendor / Camp Positions", zh: "\u5382\u5546 / \u9635\u8425\u7ACB\u573A" },
-      "pre-mortem": [
-        { en: "Failure Modes", zh: "\u5931\u8D25\u6A21\u5F0F" },
-        { en: "Downside Scenarios", zh: "\u4E0B\u884C\u60C5\u666F" }
-      ],
       "recommendations": [
         { en: "Strategic Imperatives", zh: "\u6218\u7565\u8981\u52A1" },
         { en: "Recommended Actions", zh: "\u5EFA\u8BAE\u884C\u52A8" },
@@ -4522,7 +4921,7 @@ var SCAFFOLD_SYSTEM = [
   "",
   "## Signal kind tags",
   "",
-  "Each signal in the SIGNALS block carries a bracket prefix that names the KIND of material the director extracted: `[claim]`, `[evidence\xB7data|case|quote]`, `[tension]`, `[assumption]`, `[risk\xB7high|medium|low]`, `[opportunity]`, `[action\xB7owner\xB7horizon]`, `[quote]`, `[open-q\xB7P0|P1|P2]`. **Use these tags to place each signal in the right scaffold section** \u2014 `[risk]` material belongs in `pre-mortem` or `threats-to-validity`, NOT in headline-findings; `[action]` belongs in `recommendations` or `the-bet`; `[tension]` belongs in `divergence` or as a tension on a finding; `[open-q]` belongs in `open-questions` or `new-questions`. Treat the tag as a routing hint \u2014 the writer who placed it there already classified it.",
+  "Each signal in the SIGNALS block carries a bracket prefix that names the KIND of material the director extracted: `[claim]`, `[evidence\xB7data|case|quote]`, `[tension]`, `[assumption]`, `[risk\xB7high|medium|low]`, `[opportunity]`, `[action\xB7owner\xB7horizon]`, `[quote]`, `[open-q\xB7P0|P1|P2]`. **Use these tags to place each signal in the right scaffold section** \u2014 `[risk]` material belongs in `risk-register` or `threats-to-validity`, NOT in headline-findings; `[action]` belongs in `recommendations` or `the-bet`; `[tension]` belongs in `divergence` or as a tension on a finding; `[open-q]` belongs in `open-questions` or `new-questions`. Treat the tag as a routing hint \u2014 the writer who placed it there already classified it.",
   "",
   "## Design philosophy",
   "",
@@ -4577,9 +4976,7 @@ var SCAFFOLD_SYSTEM = [
   "",
   '9. **Recommendations** \xB7 3\u20135 concrete actions, each with: `priority` (P0/P1/P2), `action` (imperative), `rationale`, `ownerType`, `horizon` (e.g. "next 30 days"), `successMetric` (observable proof of execution), `riskIfSkipped`, `expectedBenefit` (the upside if you act \u2014 stated as a concrete payoff, NOT a metric to watch). Recommendations are imperatives \u2014 "Do X" not "X should happen". The `expectedBenefit` is what gets a stakeholder to actually approve the action \u2014 it answers "if I do this, what do I get?" in one short sentence.',
   "",
-  "10. **Pre-mortem** \xB7 2\u20133 ways the recommendations could fail. Each: `scenario`, `leadingIndicator` (earliest observable warning), `mitigation`. McKinsey-grade risk thinking.",
-  "",
-  '10b. **Risk Register** (`riskRegister`) \xB7 ONLY emit when the composer picked `risk-register`; otherwise return null. 3\u20137 standing risks the operating environment poses, distinct from pre-mortem (which catalogs how the recommendation fails). Each entry: `risk` (\u2264180 chars), `category` (one of: market / execution / product / team / financial / compliance / technical), `severity` (high / medium / low), `likelihood` (high / medium / low), `owner` (functional role label \xB7 "product", "ops", "legal" \u2014 NOT a person), `mitigation` (\u2264220 chars \xB7 concrete playbook OR "monitor only"). Pick categories that match the actual risk; default to `execution` only when no other category fits.',
+  '10. **Risk Register** (`riskRegister`) \xB7 ONLY emit when the composer picked `risk-register`; otherwise return null. 3\u20137 standing risks the operating environment poses \u2014 or specific failure modes of the recommendation when the room raised them concretely. Each entry: `risk` (\u2264180 chars), `category` (one of: market / execution / product / team / financial / compliance / technical), `severity` (high / medium / low), `likelihood` (high / medium / low), `owner` (functional role label \xB7 "product", "ops", "legal" \u2014 NOT a person), `mitigation` (\u2264220 chars \xB7 concrete playbook OR "monitor only"). Pick categories that match the actual risk; default to `execution` only when no other category fits.',
   "",
   "10c. **Decision Options** (`decisionOptions`) \xB7 ONLY emit when the composer picked `decision-options`; otherwise return null. 2\u20135 named candidate options the room weighed, with shared pros/cons. Object shape: `{ intro, options: [...], rationale }`. Each option: `label` (\u226432 chars), `summary` (\u2264200 chars), `pros` (2\u20134 short clauses \u226480 chars each), `cons` (2\u20134 short clauses \u226480 chars each), `effort` (low / medium / high), `confidence` (high / medium / low), `recommended` (boolean). EXACTLY ONE option must have `recommended: true` \u2014 the room's pick. The `rationale` (\u2264280 chars) explains why the recommended option wins and connects back to the recommendations section.",
   "",
@@ -4670,9 +5067,6 @@ var SCAFFOLD_SYSTEM = [
   '  "recommendations": [',
   '    { "priority": "P0", "action": "Imperative concrete action.", "rationale": "Why this works.", "ownerType": "platform team", "horizon": "next 30 days", "successMetric": "Observable proof.", "riskIfSkipped": "What goes wrong.", "criticalDependency": "What MUST be true for this to work \u2014 the load-bearing pre-condition. Forces stress-testing.", "expectedBenefit": "The concrete upside if you act \u2014 stated as the payoff a stakeholder cares about (revenue captured / risk avoided / position locked in)." }',
   "  ],",
-  '  "preMortem": [',
-  '    { "scenario": "How it fails.", "leadingIndicator": "Earliest warning.", "mitigation": "What to do." }',
-  "  ],",
   '  "newQuestions": [',
   '    { "question": "Question?", "whyItMatters": "Why this is generative.", "surfacedByDirectorId": "dirId-b" }',
   "  ],",
@@ -4770,7 +5164,7 @@ var SCAFFOLD_SYSTEM = [
   "  \xB7 `the-bet`                    \u2192 fill `theBet: { ifBacked, conditions[3-5], killCriteria }`. Leave others.",
   "  \xB7 `considerations`             \u2192 fill `considerations` with the SAME shape as `recommendations` (3-5 items, P0/P1/P2, owner, horizon, success metric, risk-if-skipped). Voice should be hedged in the prose (we'll worry about voice at write time; the data shape is identical).",
   "",
-  "Optional kinds (`frame-shift`, `convergence`, `divergence`, `positions`, `visuals`, `two-paths`, `why-now`, `pre-mortem`, `new-questions`, `planning-assumption`, `open-questions`, `strategic-outlook`, `critical-assumptions`, `scenario-tree`, `leading-indicators`, `threats-to-validity`, `metric-strip`): when listed in the picked set, fill them as the spec above describes. When NOT listed, set them to the empty value (`[]` for arrays, `null` for nullable objects, `{shifted:false, original:'', reframed:'', trigger:''}` for frameShift).",
+  "Optional kinds (`frame-shift`, `convergence`, `divergence`, `positions`, `visuals`, `two-paths`, `why-now`, `new-questions`, `planning-assumption`, `open-questions`, `strategic-outlook`, `critical-assumptions`, `scenario-tree`, `leading-indicators`, `threats-to-validity`, `risk-register`, `metric-strip`): when listed in the picked set, fill them as the spec above describes. When NOT listed, set them to the empty value (`[]` for arrays, `null` for nullable objects, `{shifted:false, original:'', reframed:'', trigger:''}` for frameShift).",
   "",
   "## Substitute schemas (when picked)",
   "",
@@ -4871,14 +5265,14 @@ var SCAFFOLD_SYSTEM = [
   "[",
   "  {",
   '    "category": "\u2264 50 chars \xB7 concrete category name (e.g. \\"Selection bias\\", \\"Generalizability ceiling\\", \\"Construct validity\\", \\"Confounding factor\\", \\"Sample of N=1\\", \\"Lens blind spot\\", \\"Survivorship\\", \\"Anchoring on the loudest director\\"). Pick a NAMED category \u2014 not a free-form essay.",',
-  '    "threat": "1-2 sentences (\u2264 280 chars) naming WHAT about the *analysis itself* could mislead. Distinct from pre-mortem (how the recommended action could fail) and from critical-assumptions (the assumptions the brief rests on).",',
+  '    "threat": "1-2 sentences (\u2264 280 chars) naming WHAT about the *analysis itself* could mislead. Distinct from risk-register (operating-environment risks) and from critical-assumptions (the assumptions the brief rests on).",',
   '    "observable": "What you would see if this threat is realized (\u2264 200 chars). Without an observable, a threat is just a hedge \u2014 it must be falsifiable.",',
   '    "severity": "low | medium | high",',
   '    "mitigation": "What would address or defuse this threat (\u2264 200 chars). Set null when the room had no concrete mitigation."',
   "  }",
   "]",
   "```",
-  'Threats name limits of the analysis, not limits of the conclusion. "The recommendation might fail if X" is pre-mortem material; "our analysis only consulted Western strategy directors so the conclusion may not generalize" is a threat to validity. Pick at most 5; below 3 reads as token effort, above 5 turns into noise.',
+  'Threats name limits of the analysis, not limits of the conclusion. "The recommendation might fail if X" is risk-register material; "our analysis only consulted Western strategy directors so the conclusion may not generalize" is a threat to validity. Pick at most 5; below 3 reads as token effort, above 5 turns into noise.',
   "",
   "`metricStrip` (3\u20135 dashboard-style KPI cards \xB7 the room's quantitative reads side-by-side):",
   "```json",
@@ -4927,7 +5321,6 @@ function pickedBlock(picked) {
     "recommendations",
     "the-bet",
     "considerations",
-    "pre-mortem",
     "new-questions",
     "planning-assumption",
     "open-questions",
@@ -5238,7 +5631,7 @@ var WRITE_SYSTEM = [
   "  \xB7 `Threats to Validity` \u2192 \u25C7 `flowchart TD` ONLY when threats compound (sample bias \u2192 selection bias \u2192 generalizability ceiling) with branching, 5+ nodes.",
   "  \xB7 `Recommendations` \u2192 \u2713 `gantt` for multi-phase rollouts (\u2265 2 sections AND \u2265 4 tasks). For sequenced action chains under 4 tasks, use prose / numbered list \u2014 NOT a linear flowchart.",
   "  \xB7 `Leading Indicators` \u2192 \u25C7 `stateDiagram-v2` when indicators map to \u2265 4 scenario states with at least one feedback loop / back-transition.",
-  "  \xB7 `Pre-mortem` \u2192 \u2713 `flowchart TD` when there are \u2265 3 failure modes EACH with its own leading-indicator + mitigation as sub-nodes (root + 3 modes + 6+ children = 10 nodes). With 2 failure modes, the typed table alone reads cleanly.",
+  "  \xB7 `Risk Register` \u2192 \u2713 `flowchart TD` when there are \u2265 5 risks AND multiple risks share a category cluster (root \u2192 category nodes \u2192 individual risks as leaves = \u2265 10 nodes). The typed risk table is enough on its own when the register is < 5 entries.",
   "  \xB7 `Risk Register` \u2192 \u2713 `quadrantChart` of severity \xD7 likelihood (always \u2014 the quadrant chart is a 2-axis plot, not subject to the flowchart-complexity floor).",
   "  \xB7 `New Questions This Surfaced` \u2192 \u25C7 `mindmap` when there are \u2265 4 new questions clustering into \u2265 3 themes.",
   "  \xB7 `Strategic Planning Assumption` \u2192 \u25C7 rarely.",
@@ -5247,14 +5640,14 @@ var WRITE_SYSTEM = [
   `**Reading the trigger map**: \u2713 does NOT mean "always emit". It means "emit when the material is non-trivial AND the complexity floor is met". When in doubt about whether content has enough structure, render prose / a typed table \u2014 those don't have a complexity floor and never read as naive.`,
   "",
   "**Routing constraints** (avoid double-rendering the same content):",
-  "  \xB7 Pre-mortem flowchart + Pre-mortem table = \u2713 both, complementary.",
+  "  \xB7 Risk Register flowchart + Risk Register table = \u2713 both, complementary.",
   "  \xB7 Risk Register quadrantChart + Risk Register table = \u2713 both, complementary.",
   "  \xB7 A single section gets at MOST one inline mermaid (plus the typed visual if any). Never stack 2+ inline charts in one section.",
   "  \xB7 A `gantt` and a `flowchart` covering the SAME recommendation rollout = pick one (gantt if dates matter, flowchart if branching matters).",
   "  \xB7 If a typed `visuals` block already covers a content shape (e.g. `bar-chart` for ranked options), don't add an inline `flowchart` for the same options.",
   "",
   "  ### flowchart \xB7 decision tree / process branches",
-  '  Use when a section argues a decision sequence ("if X then Y else Z") or a process where order + branching matters. Natural fits: pre-mortem branches ("if leading-indicator A fires, do P; else hold"), the divergence section when there are 3+ positions, scenario trees with named effects.',
+  '  Use when a section argues a decision sequence ("if X then Y else Z") or a process where order + branching matters. Natural fits: risk-register branches ("if risk A materialises, do P; else monitor"), the divergence section when there are 3+ positions, scenario trees with named effects.',
   "    ```",
   "    flowchart TD",
   "        A[Starting state] --> B{Decision point}",
@@ -5388,9 +5781,6 @@ var WRITE_SYSTEM = [
   "    The _What this earns_ line is the upside payoff in a stakeholder's language (revenue captured / risk avoided / position locked in / time saved). Render it whenever `expectedBenefit` is non-empty; skip the line only when the field is absent or empty. This is the line that gets the action approved \u2014 without it, the recommendation reads as cost without payoff.",
   "    Length budget \xB7 the WHOLE Recommendations section should land between 1,500 and 2,500 characters total. Per item: ~400\u2013600 chars including all the labelled lines. The Rationale field is the only one that benefits from elaboration (1\u20132 sentences); every other labelled line is a single phrase or clause. Keep the action / metric / risk / dependency / benefit lines tight \u2014 verbose action items get skipped.",
   "",
-  "  ## Pre-mortem",
-  "  Skip if `preMortem` is empty. Otherwise a markdown table with columns `Failure mode | Leading indicator | Mitigation`. One row per failure mode. Leave a BLANK LINE between the section heading / any intro prose and the table's header row \u2014 without that gap markdown parsers concatenate the prose with the table and the pipe syntax leaks as text.",
-  "",
   "  ## Risk Register",
   "  Skip if `riskRegister` is empty / null. Otherwise render TWO complementary blocks (in this order):",
   "",
@@ -5412,7 +5802,7 @@ var WRITE_SYSTEM = [
   "       ```",
   "       Leave a BLANK LINE between the H2 heading and the fenced ```mermaid block.",
   "",
-  "    2. **Risk table** \u2014 markdown table with columns `Risk | Category | Severity | Likelihood | Owner | Mitigation`. One row per `RiskItem`. Sort rows: severity high before medium before low; within the same severity, likelihood high before medium before low. Render category and severity / likelihood as **bold inline tags** (`**Market**`, `**High**`). Leave a BLANK LINE between the quadrant chart and the table header row \xB7 same gluing rule as Pre-mortem.",
+  "    2. **Risk table** \u2014 markdown table with columns `Risk | Category | Severity | Likelihood | Owner | Mitigation`. One row per `RiskItem`. Sort rows: severity high before medium before low; within the same severity, likelihood high before medium before low. Render category and severity / likelihood as **bold inline tags** (`**Market**`, `**High**`). Leave a BLANK LINE between the quadrant chart and the table header row \xB7 without that gap markdown parsers concatenate the prose with the table and pipe syntax leaks.",
   '       When `mitigation` is the literal string `"monitor only"`, render the cell as italic: `_monitor only_` so the reader sees this row as a watch-list rather than a closeable risk.',
   "",
   `  Section title alternatives \u2014 pick one that matches the brief's voice: "Risk Register" (default \xB7 McKinsey/Gartner), "Standing Risks" (a16z), "Risks We're Carrying" (Anthropic-essay).`,
@@ -5459,7 +5849,7 @@ var WRITE_SYSTEM = [
   "       Body line under the table (mono caps for the tags): `**Effort:** {effort} \xB7 **Confidence:** {confidence}`. Use the literal title-cased values (Low / Medium / High).",
   "    3. Final paragraph: `**Why {recommended.label}:** {rationale}` \u2014 the takeaway anchored to the recommended option.",
   `  Section title alternatives: "Decision Options" (default), "Options We Weighed" (Anthropic-essay), "The Path We're Recommending" (a16z).`,
-  "  Leave a BLANK LINE between the section H2 and the first H3 option, AND between each option's table and the next H3 \u2014 without those gaps the table syntax leaks. SAME gluing rule as Pre-mortem and Risk Register above.",
+  "  Leave a BLANK LINE between the section H2 and the first H3 option, AND between each option's table and the next H3 \u2014 without those gaps the table syntax leaks. SAME gluing rule as Risk Register above.",
   "",
   "  ## New Questions This Surfaced",
   "  Skip if `newQuestions` is empty. Otherwise:",
@@ -5481,6 +5871,23 @@ var WRITE_SYSTEM = [
   "  ## Open Questions",
   "  Skip if `openQuestions` is empty. Otherwise a bulleted list. Each bullet: priority badge `**\\`P0\\`**` or `\\`P1\\`` followed by the question text.",
   "",
+  "  ## Where This Leaves You",
+  `  ALWAYS render \u2014 this is the report's narrative close. Without it the body ends on a list (Recommendations / Leading Indicators / Open Questions) and the reader experiences "\u621B\u7136\u800C\u6B62" \u2014 abrupt drop-out. The Closing reorients the reader before the methodology footer.`,
+  "",
+  '  Tight prose paragraph \u2014 3 to 4 sentences, \u2264 360 chars total. NO bullets, NO tables, NO labels ("Echo:" / "Action:"), NO sub-headings. The structure is internal to the prose:',
+  "    1. **ECHO** \xB7 paraphrase the bottom line / thesis / working hypothesis in collapsed form. Don't quote it; render its essence in tighter language than the opening did. \u2264 1 sentence.",
+  "    2. **ACKNOWLEDGE** \xB7 name the unresolved unknown that would change the call. Pull from highest-priority `openQuestions` (P0 first), or the most fragile entry in `criticalAssumptions`, or a load-bearing `riskRegister` row, or the SPA falsifier. Skip this beat ONLY when the room genuinely surfaced no real uncertainty. \u2264 1 sentence.",
+  '    3. **POINT FORWARD** \xB7 one specific next move. From `recommendations[0].action` collapsed to \u2264 16 words, or `theBet.commitment`, or for considerations: "the next thing worth testing is X". Imperative, concrete, not a meta-instruction. \u2264 1 sentence.',
+  "",
+  '  House style alternatives for the section title (override the default "Where This Leaves You"):',
+  '    \xB7 mckinsey-deck \u2192 "Next Steps"',
+  '    \xB7 a16z-thesis \u2192 "If This Holds"',
+  '    \xB7 gartner-research \u2192 "What to Watch"',
+  '    \xB7 anthropic-essay \u2192 "Where We Are Left"',
+  '    \xB7 boardroom-default / 8bit / others \u2192 "Where This Leaves You"',
+  "",
+  "  Voice register applies (mckinsey is imperative, anthropic is reflective, a16z is implicational), but the 3-sentence Echo\u2192Acknowledge\u2192Point-Forward structure is INVARIANT across styles. If you find yourself writing a 4th paragraph or > 360 chars or adding bullets, you've over-built it \u2014 the Closing's whole job is the felt close, a tight prose moment.",
+  "",
   "## Substitute components (composer-driven \xB7 render only when filled)",
   "",
   "  ### thesis (anchor alternative)",
@@ -5578,7 +5985,7 @@ var WRITE_SYSTEM = [
   "      | Category | Threat | Observable | Severity | Mitigation |",
   "      | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- |",
   "      | {category} | {threat} | {observable} | **`Severity`** | {mitigation or \u2014} |",
-  "    Don't pad the section with prose \u2014 the table IS the section. The voice register from the picked house style applies, but the table structure stays identical across styles. Threats here name the limits of the *analysis*, not the limits of the *recommendation* (that's pre-mortem).",
+  "    Don't pad the section with prose \u2014 the table IS the section. The voice register from the picked house style applies, but the table structure stays identical across styles. Threats here name the limits of the *analysis*, not the limits of the *recommendation* (recommendation-failure goes in risk-register when picked).",
   "",
   "  ### metricStrip (dashboard \xB7 the room's numbers as a row of KPI cards)",
   "  When `scaffold.metricStrip` is non-null AND was picked, render it as the report's first quantitative beat \u2014 natural slot is RIGHT AFTER the anchor (Bottom Line / Thesis / Working Hypothesis), so a reader skimming the top of the report sees the headline judgement followed immediately by the numbers behind it. Acceptable alternative slot: right before Recommendations, when the numbers frame the action rather than the judgement.",
@@ -5719,10 +6126,14 @@ var DEFAULT_KIND_LABELS = {
   "leading-indicators": "Leading Indicators",
   "threats-to-validity": "Threats to Validity",
   "metric-strip": "By the Numbers",
-  "pre-mortem": "Pre-mortem",
   "new-questions": "New Questions This Surfaced",
   "planning-assumption": "Strategic Planning Assumption",
   "open-questions": "Open Questions"
+  // Note · the always-rendered "Where This Leaves You" closing
+  // section is NOT in this dictionary — it's not a composer-picked
+  // component, just a structural close. Its heading + house-style
+  // alternatives ("Next Steps" / "If This Holds" / "What to Watch")
+  // are described directly in the WRITE_SYSTEM section render rule.
 };
 function buildHouseStyleAddendum(styleId, language, seed) {
   const style = resolveHouseStyle(styleId);
@@ -5960,13 +6371,6 @@ function buildWriteMessages(opts) {
       ...r.expectedBenefit ? [`    Expected benefit: ${r.expectedBenefit}`] : []
     ].join("\n");
   }).join("\n\n") : "  (no recommendations \u2014 skip the section)";
-  const preMortemBlock = scaffold.preMortem.length ? scaffold.preMortem.map(
-    (f, i) => [
-      `  Failure ${i + 1}: ${f.scenario}`,
-      `    Leading indicator: ${f.leadingIndicator}`,
-      `    Mitigation: ${f.mitigation}`
-    ].join("\n")
-  ).join("\n\n") : "  (no pre-mortem \u2014 skip the section)";
   const newQuestionsBlock = scaffold.newQuestions.length ? scaffold.newQuestions.map(
     (q, i) => [
       `  New Q ${i + 1}: ${q.question}`,
@@ -6183,9 +6587,6 @@ function buildWriteMessages(opts) {
         `## Recommendations`,
         recsBlock,
         ``,
-        `## Pre-mortem`,
-        preMortemBlock,
-        ``,
         `## New Questions`,
         newQuestionsBlock,
         ``,
@@ -6256,7 +6657,7 @@ function buildWriteMessages(opts) {
           `\u2500\u2500\u2500 END SUPPLEMENT \u2500\u2500\u2500`,
           ``
         ] : [],
-        `Write the final report now. Markdown only (the metricStrip / path-comparison / views-compared fenced blocks are embedded HTML \u2014 every other section is markdown). Start with the H2 title \u2014 no preamble. Replace director ids with display names from the directors list above. Follow the section order: Bottom Line / Thesis / Working Hypothesis (anchor) \u2192 Metric Strip (when picked) \u2192 Strategic Outlook (when picked) \u2192 Frame Shift \u2192 Headline Findings (or Big Ideas) \u2192 Where We Converged \u2192 Where We Diverged \u2192 Positions \u2192 Views Compared (MANDATORY when \u2265 2 active directors) \u2192 A Comparison (when picked \xB7 path-comparison) \u2192 Options Analysis / Two Paths \u2192 Decision Options (when picked) \u2192 Critical Assumptions (when picked) \u2192 Threats to Validity (when picked) \u2192 Scenario Tree (when picked) \u2192 Why Now (when picked) \u2192 Recommendations / The Bet / Considerations (action) \u2192 Leading Indicators (when picked) \u2192 Pre-mortem \u2192 Risk Register (when picked) \u2192 New Questions This Surfaced \u2192 Strategic Planning Assumption \u2192 Open Questions.`
+        `Write the final report now. Markdown only (the metricStrip / path-comparison / views-compared fenced blocks are embedded HTML \u2014 every other section is markdown). Start with the H2 title \u2014 no preamble. Replace director ids with display names from the directors list above. Follow the section order: Bottom Line / Thesis / Working Hypothesis (anchor) \u2192 Metric Strip (when picked) \u2192 Strategic Outlook (when picked) \u2192 Frame Shift \u2192 Headline Findings (or Big Ideas) \u2192 Where We Converged \u2192 Where We Diverged \u2192 Positions \u2192 Views Compared (MANDATORY when \u2265 2 active directors) \u2192 A Comparison (when picked \xB7 path-comparison) \u2192 Options Analysis / Two Paths \u2192 Decision Options (when picked) \u2192 Critical Assumptions (when picked) \u2192 Threats to Validity (when picked) \u2192 Scenario Tree (when picked) \u2192 Why Now (when picked) \u2192 Risk Register (when picked) \u2192 New Questions This Surfaced \u2192 Strategic Planning Assumption \u2192 Open Questions \u2192 Recommendations / The Bet / Considerations (action) \u2192 Leading Indicators (when picked) \u2192 Where This Leaves You (ALWAYS \u2014 narrative close that reorients the reader). The Closing is the report's last body section before the methodology footer; without it the report ends on a list and feels truncated. Render order is now uncertainty-then-action: lay out what's true / what's still open BEFORE telling the user what to do, so the action sits at the end where it lands hardest.`
       ].join("\n")
     }
   ];
@@ -6810,23 +7211,6 @@ function parseRecommendations(raw) {
   });
   return out;
 }
-function parsePreMortem(raw) {
-  if (!Array.isArray(raw)) return [];
-  const out = [];
-  for (const f of raw) {
-    if (!f || typeof f !== "object") continue;
-    const o = f;
-    const scenario = typeof o.scenario === "string" ? o.scenario.trim() : "";
-    if (!scenario) continue;
-    out.push({
-      scenario,
-      leadingIndicator: typeof o.leadingIndicator === "string" ? o.leadingIndicator.trim() : "",
-      mitigation: typeof o.mitigation === "string" ? o.mitigation.trim() : ""
-    });
-    if (out.length >= 4) break;
-  }
-  return out;
-}
 var RISK_CATEGORIES = [
   "market",
   "execution",
@@ -7315,7 +7699,6 @@ function parseScaffold(raw, fallbackTitle, fallbackOriginalQuestion) {
     recommendations: parseRecommendations(parsed.recommendations),
     theBet,
     considerations: considerationsField,
-    preMortem: parsePreMortem(parsed.preMortem),
     newQuestions: parseNewQuestions(parsed.newQuestions),
     planningAssumption: parsePlanningAssumption(parsed.planningAssumption),
     strategicOutlook: parseStrategicOutlook(parsed.strategicOutlook),
@@ -7368,7 +7751,6 @@ var COMPONENT_KINDS = [
   "visuals",
   "two-paths",
   "why-now",
-  "pre-mortem",
   "new-questions",
   "planning-assumption",
   "open-questions",
@@ -7382,11 +7764,12 @@ var COMPONENT_KINDS = [
   "leading-indicators",
   // Self-criticism block · names how the analysis itself could be
   // wrong (selection bias, generalizability ceiling, lens blind
-  // spots). Distinct from `pre-mortem` (how the recommendation could
-  // fail) and `critical-assumptions` (the foundations the brief rests
-  // on). Highest fit for `anthropic` / `gartner-research` styles, but
-  // a useful add to any brief that wants to surface intellectual
-  // honesty as a load-bearing section instead of an appendix caveat.
+  // spots). Distinct from `risk-register` (operating-environment
+  // risks) and `critical-assumptions` (the foundations the brief
+  // rests on). Highest fit for `anthropic` / `gartner-research`
+  // styles, but a useful add to any brief that wants to surface
+  // intellectual honesty as a load-bearing section instead of an
+  // appendix caveat.
   "threats-to-validity",
   // Dashboard-style indicator strip · 3-5 KPI cards (label / value /
   // qualifier / trend / attribution). The "by the numbers" beat right
@@ -7397,11 +7780,13 @@ var COMPONENT_KINDS = [
   "metric-strip",
   // Standing risk landscape · 3-7 environment / product / team /
   // market risks with severity × likelihood × owner × mitigation.
-  // Distinct from `pre-mortem` (which catalogs ways the
-  // RECOMMENDATION fails) — risk-register catalogs risks that exist
-  // whether or not we act. Strong fit for strategy / execution
-  // briefs and any room where the operating environment is the
-  // hinge.
+  // Carries both environmental risks (whether or not we act) AND
+  // concrete recommendation-failure modes when the room raised
+  // them. (Replaces the old `pre-mortem` slot · its scenario /
+  // leading-indicator / mitigation shape collapses cleanly into
+  // a risk-register row.) Strong fit for strategy / execution
+  // briefs and any room where the operating environment or
+  // recommendation-failure is the hinge.
   "risk-register",
   // Structured N-option comparison · 2-5 candidate options with
   // shared pros/cons + an explicit recommended pick. Distinct from
@@ -7443,10 +7828,10 @@ var DEFAULT_PRESET = [
   { kind: "divergence", order: 6 },
   { kind: "positions", order: 7 },
   { kind: "visuals", order: 8 },
-  { kind: "recommendations", order: 9 },
-  { kind: "pre-mortem", order: 10 },
-  { kind: "new-questions", order: 11 },
-  { kind: "open-questions", order: 12 }
+  { kind: "risk-register", order: 9 },
+  { kind: "new-questions", order: 10 },
+  { kind: "open-questions", order: 11 },
+  { kind: "recommendations", order: 12 }
 ];
 var SYSTEM_PROMPT = [
   "You are the Boardroom report composer. Pick (a) the house style, (b) the spine, and (c) the components that will produce the most useful brief for THIS specific room. Pick deliberately \u2014 the same room under different house styles reads as a different document. Avoid defaulting to `boardroom-default` unless the room genuinely doesn't fit any of the named registers.",
@@ -7507,8 +7892,7 @@ var SYSTEM_PROMPT = [
   "  \xB7 `metric-strip`        3\u20135 KPI / indicator cards \xB7 the room's quantitative reads as a dashboard row. Pick whenever \u2265 3 numbers (percentages, time windows, ratios, counts, ranges) showed up worth surfacing side-by-side. Massively higher information density than the same numbers buried in prose \u2014 strongly favoured for investment / market-forecast / strategic-decision briefs.",
   "  \xB7 `two-paths`           Side-by-side trajectory comparison (Path A vs Path B). Pick when the room argued two distinct futures or routes \u2014 punchier than a comparison-table.",
   "  \xB7 `why-now`             Single panel: window opened by what \xB7 window closes when \xB7 the bet implied. For investment / opportunity rooms (a16z-thesis spine).",
-  "  \xB7 `pre-mortem`          2\u20133 failure modes with leading indicators + mitigations. Pair with `recommendations` or `the-bet` when the call is high-stakes. Distinct from `risk-register` \u2014 pre-mortem is action-failure, risk-register is environmental.",
-  "  \xB7 `risk-register`       3\u20137 standing risks (market / execution / product / team / financial / compliance / technical), each tagged with severity \xD7 likelihood \xD7 owner \xD7 mitigation. Distinct from `pre-mortem` \u2014 pre-mortem catalogs how the RECOMMENDATION fails, risk-register catalogs the risks that exist whether or not we act. Pick whenever the room had \u2265 3 risk signals and the operating environment is consequential. Strong fit for strategy_memo / execution_plan / risk_review archetypes.",
+  "  \xB7 `risk-register`       3\u20137 risks tagged with severity \xD7 likelihood \xD7 owner \xD7 mitigation. Carries BOTH operating-environment risks (whether or not we act) AND concrete recommendation-failure modes when the room raised them. Categories: market / execution / product / team / financial / compliance / technical. Pick whenever the room had \u2265 3 risk signals and the call is consequential. Strong fit for strategy_memo / execution_plan / risk_review archetypes.",
   "  \xB7 `decision-options`    2\u20135 named candidate options with shared pros/cons, effort + confidence tags, and ONE flagged as the recommended pick + a rationale anchor. Distinct from `comparison-table` (raw freeform matrix) and `two-paths` (binary). Pick whenever the room weighed \u2265 2 named options and the choice is the load-bearing output. Strong fit for decision_brief / debate_summary archetypes.",
   '  \xB7 `path-comparison`     EXACTLY 2 paths \xB7 verdict-tagged side-by-side structural comparison. Each path: short verdict ("structurally fragile" / "plausibly defensible"), serif name, 4-6 characteristic bullets. Stance ("weak" / "strong" / "neutral") drives accent colour \u2014 the verdict IS the recommendation, no separate flag. Highest fit when the room\'s hinge was ONE binary structural choice (replacement vs augmentation, vertical vs horizontal, build vs partner, replace vs augment) where one trajectory is structurally weaker. Distinct from `two-paths` (prose-only, no verdict) and `decision-options` (N options with matrix). Pair `path-comparison` with the binary view; pair `decision-options` with N>2 options; pair `two-paths` only when the comparison is narrative prose without bullet structure.',
   "  \xB7 `new-questions`       Questions that did NOT exist when the room opened but emerged. The most generative output of a multi-director session.",
@@ -7520,7 +7904,7 @@ var SYSTEM_PROMPT = [
   "  \xB7 `critical-assumptions`  4\u20136 load-bearing assumptions, each with confidence + falsifier + time horizon. Use when the brief's logic rests on assumptions that could shift \u2014 surfacing them lets the reader stress-test the conclusion.",
   "  \xB7 `scenario-tree`         2\u20134 named futures (typically Base / Upside / Downside) with probabilities, triggers, effects, decision implications. Use whenever the room argued multiple futures \u2014 richer than `two-paths` because it adds probability + trigger + decision implication per branch.",
   "  \xB7 `leading-indicators`    3\u20135 signals to monitor with thresholds + cadence + scenario each indicator confirms. Use when the brief tells the reader to wait-and-watch, or when scenarios diverge based on observable signals.",
-  "  \xB7 `threats-to-validity`   3\u20135 ways the *analysis itself* could be wrong (selection bias, generalizability ceiling, sample of N, lens blind spot, confounding). Each names a category, the threat in 1-2 sentences, an observable that would prove it realized, severity, and an optional mitigation. Distinct from `pre-mortem` (how the *recommendation* could fail) and from `critical-assumptions` (the foundations the brief rests on). Pull in for `anthropic` / `gartner-research` / any brief where the room had a real moment of intellectual honesty \u2014 surfacing how we could be wrong is a load-bearing section, not a caveat.",
+  "  \xB7 `threats-to-validity`   3\u20135 ways the *analysis itself* could be wrong (selection bias, generalizability ceiling, sample of N, lens blind spot, confounding). Each names a category, the threat in 1-2 sentences, an observable that would prove it realized, severity, and an optional mitigation. Distinct from `risk-register` (operating-environment risks) and from `critical-assumptions` (the foundations the brief rests on). Pull in for `anthropic` / `gartner-research` / any brief where the room had a real moment of intellectual honesty \u2014 surfacing how we could be wrong is a load-bearing section, not a caveat.",
   "",
   "## Composition rules \xB7 violations are rejected",
   "",
@@ -7537,7 +7921,7 @@ var SYSTEM_PROMPT = [
   "The user message's ASSET BUDGET prints `Coverage triggers` listing what the room produced material for. Each trigger names a component (or alternatives) that MUST appear in your pick. Ignoring a trigger is automatic rejection by validatePicks \u2014 the rationale being: if the room raised tensions / risks / open questions / concrete actions / data, the report MUST surface them in a structurally distinct component, not bury them in generic findings.",
   "",
   "\xB7 `tensions \u2265 1` \u2192 MUST include `divergence` OR `positions`.",
-  "\xB7 `risks \u2265 1` \u2192 MUST include `pre-mortem` OR `threats-to-validity`.",
+  "\xB7 `risks \u2265 1` \u2192 MUST include `risk-register` OR `threats-to-validity`.",
   "\xB7 `openQuestions \u2265 1` \u2192 MUST include `open-questions` OR `new-questions`.",
   "\xB7 `actions \u2265 2` (concrete imperatives) \u2192 action component must be `recommendations` or `the-bet`, NOT `considerations` (which softens imperatives into hedges).",
   "\xB7 `dataAvailable \u2265 3` (data-lens claims + data-kind evidence) \u2192 MUST include `metric-strip` OR `visuals`. Numbers buried in prose lose their force.",
@@ -7546,7 +7930,7 @@ var SYSTEM_PROMPT = [
   "",
   "## Visualisation discipline \xB7 prefer mermaid where it fits naturally",
   "",
-  "Reports benefit from diagrams when content has structure prose can't carry efficiently \u2014 but no fixed quota. Pick components that auto-fire mermaid (divergence / positions / decision-options / scenario-tree / pre-mortem / recommendations / risk-register / convergence) when their material is real in the room. Skip them when material is thin. Source of mermaid (either / both):",
+  "Reports benefit from diagrams when content has structure prose can't carry efficiently \u2014 but no fixed quota. Pick components that auto-fire mermaid (divergence / positions / decision-options / scenario-tree / risk-register / recommendations / convergence) when their material is real in the room. Skip them when material is thin. Source of mermaid (either / both):",
   "  1. Pick `visuals` with mermaid sub-types (`quadrant-chart` / `bar-chart` / `timeline` / `pie-chart`) \u2014 directly produces typed visuals.",
   "  2. Stage 3 writer auto-emits inline mermaid (`flowchart` / `mindmap` / `gantt` / `sequenceDiagram` / `stateDiagram` / `journey`) on a per-section basis when content fits \u2014 knowing this helps you avoid double-allocating the same content to a typed visual.",
   "",
@@ -7559,19 +7943,19 @@ var SYSTEM_PROMPT = [
   "  \xB7 Watch-and-wait stance with named signals to monitor \u2192 `leading-indicators`.",
   "  \xB7 ANY chronology of \u2265 3 dated events (history / phases / projected sequence) \u2192 `visuals.timeline` is the strongest pick \u2014 chronology MUST go to timeline, not prose.",
   "  \xB7 ANY distribution of weights that sums (vote counts, scenario probabilities, lens shares, market mix) \u2192 `visuals.pie-chart`.",
-  "  \xB7 ANY decision branch / if-then logic the room raised \u2192 the writer auto-emits an inline `flowchart`. You don't need to plan it, but ensure `pre-mortem` or `divergence` is picked so the writer has a section to attach it to.",
+  "  \xB7 ANY decision branch / if-then logic the room raised \u2192 the writer auto-emits an inline `flowchart`. You don't need to plan it, but ensure `risk-register` or `divergence` is picked so the writer has a section to attach it to.",
   "  \xB7 ANY brainstorm-style branching (radial framings / idea clusters off a central premise) \u2192 the writer auto-emits an inline `mindmap`. Pair with `big-ideas` or `new-questions` so it has a home.",
   "  \xB7 ANY multi-phase rollout with dependencies \u2192 the writer auto-emits an inline `gantt` inside `recommendations`. Ensure `recommendations` is picked (not `considerations`).",
   "  \xB7 ANY multi-party negotiation / approval-chain / system-call sequence \u2192 the writer auto-emits an inline `sequenceDiagram`. Surfaces under whichever section names the actors.",
-  "  \xB7 ANY lifecycle / state-machine / phase-gating story \u2192 the writer auto-emits an inline `stateDiagram-v2`. Attach to `recommendations` or a `pre-mortem` branch.",
+  "  \xB7 ANY lifecycle / state-machine / phase-gating story \u2192 the writer auto-emits an inline `stateDiagram-v2`. Attach to `recommendations` or a `risk-register` branch.",
   "",
   "Truly unvisualisable rooms (purely philosophical / definitional / no concrete entities) are allowed to skip \u2014 but they're rare. **When in doubt, pick `visuals` with a mermaid sub-type.** Reports without a mermaid chart in 2026 read as 2018-era memos.",
   "",
   "## Picking presets",
   "",
   "\xB7 If unsure \u2192 `boardroom-dark` spine and the safe set: `bottom-line` + `frame-shift` + `headline-findings` + `convergence` (or `divergence`) + `visuals` (or `metric-strip` when the room had numbers) + `recommendations` + `new-questions` + `open-questions`. Note the visual is in the safe set now \u2014 earlier presets that omitted visualisation produced flat reports.",
-  "\xB7 Strategic / market / forecast / impact-analysis subjects \u2192 `boardroom-dark` (or `gartner-note`) spine and the dense set: `bottom-line` + `metric-strip` + `strategic-outlook` + `headline-findings` + `critical-assumptions` + `scenario-tree` + `recommendations` + `leading-indicators` + `pre-mortem` + `new-questions`. ~10 components \u2014 feels like a research dashboard.",
-  "\xB7 Investment / market opportunity rooms \u2192 `a16z-thesis` spine and: `thesis` + `metric-strip` + `why-now` + `big-ideas` + `the-bet` + `pre-mortem` + `scenario-tree` + `new-questions`. The metric-strip carries the underwriting numbers.",
+  "\xB7 Strategic / market / forecast / impact-analysis subjects \u2192 `boardroom-dark` (or `gartner-note`) spine and the dense set: `bottom-line` + `metric-strip` + `strategic-outlook` + `headline-findings` + `critical-assumptions` + `scenario-tree` + `risk-register` + `leading-indicators` + `recommendations` + `new-questions`. ~10 components \u2014 feels like a research dashboard.",
+  "\xB7 Investment / market opportunity rooms \u2192 `a16z-thesis` spine and: `thesis` + `metric-strip` + `why-now` + `big-ideas` + `risk-register` + `scenario-tree` + `new-questions` + `the-bet`. The metric-strip carries the underwriting numbers; the-bet sits last as the action close.",
   "",
   "## Spine catalogue",
   "",
@@ -7689,7 +8073,7 @@ ${lines.join("\n")}`;
     coverageTriggers.push(`\xB7 ${counts.tensions} tension${counts.tensions === 1 ? "" : "s"} surfaced \u2192 MUST include \`divergence\` OR \`positions\` (don't bury tensions inside generic findings).`);
   }
   if (counts.risks > 0) {
-    coverageTriggers.push(`\xB7 ${counts.risks} risk${counts.risks === 1 ? "" : "s"} surfaced \u2192 MUST include \`pre-mortem\` OR \`threats-to-validity\`.`);
+    coverageTriggers.push(`\xB7 ${counts.risks} risk${counts.risks === 1 ? "" : "s"} surfaced \u2192 MUST include \`risk-register\` OR \`threats-to-validity\`.`);
   }
   if (counts.openQuestions > 0) {
     coverageTriggers.push(`\xB7 ${counts.openQuestions} open question${counts.openQuestions === 1 ? "" : "s"} surfaced \u2192 MUST include \`open-questions\` OR \`new-questions\`.`);
@@ -7838,8 +8222,8 @@ function validatePicks(picks, coverage = {}) {
   if (tensions > 0 && !kinds.has("divergence") && !kinds.has("positions")) {
     return { reason: `${tensions} tension(s) surfaced; pick must include 'divergence' or 'positions'` };
   }
-  if (risks > 0 && !kinds.has("pre-mortem") && !kinds.has("threats-to-validity")) {
-    return { reason: `${risks} risk(s) surfaced; pick must include 'pre-mortem' or 'threats-to-validity'` };
+  if (risks > 0 && !kinds.has("risk-register") && !kinds.has("threats-to-validity")) {
+    return { reason: `${risks} risk(s) surfaced; pick must include 'risk-register' or 'threats-to-validity'` };
   }
   if (openQuestions > 0 && !kinds.has("open-questions") && !kinds.has("new-questions")) {
     return { reason: `${openQuestions} open question(s) surfaced; pick must include 'open-questions' or 'new-questions'` };
@@ -8750,7 +9134,7 @@ function estimateStage3Eta(args) {
   let signalsTokens = 0;
   for (const d of args.perDirectorSignals) signalsTokens += d.signals.length * 80;
   const inputTokens = SYS_TOKENS.write + estimateTokens(scaffoldText) + signalsTokens + args.members.length * 50 + 250;
-  const sectionsPresent = 1 + 1 + args.scaffold.headlineFindings.length + (args.scaffold.convergence.length ? 1 : 0) + (args.scaffold.divergence ? 1 : 0) + (args.scaffold.positions.length ? 1 : 0) + (args.scaffold.visuals.length ? 1 : 0) + (args.scaffold.recommendations.length ? 1 : 0) + (args.scaffold.preMortem.length ? 1 : 0) + (args.scaffold.newQuestions.length ? 1 : 0) + (args.scaffold.planningAssumption ? 1 : 0) + (args.scaffold.openQuestions.length ? 1 : 0);
+  const sectionsPresent = 1 + 1 + args.scaffold.headlineFindings.length + (args.scaffold.convergence.length ? 1 : 0) + (args.scaffold.divergence ? 1 : 0) + (args.scaffold.positions.length ? 1 : 0) + (args.scaffold.visuals.length ? 1 : 0) + (args.scaffold.recommendations.length ? 1 : 0) + (args.scaffold.newQuestions.length ? 1 : 0) + (args.scaffold.planningAssumption ? 1 : 0) + (args.scaffold.openQuestions.length ? 1 : 0) + 1;
   const outputTokens = Math.max(3500, sectionsPresent * 350 + 1500);
   const t = llmTimeSec(inputTokens, outputTokens, "opus");
   return asEta(t, 0.7, 1.5);
@@ -9120,7 +9504,7 @@ var SCAFFOLD_SUB_STAGES = [
 var SCAFFOLD_TRIGGERS = {
   "scaffold-findings": /"headlineFindings"\s*:/,
   "scaffold-cluster": /"convergence"\s*:|"divergence"\s*:|"positions"\s*:/,
-  "scaffold-actions": /"recommendations"\s*:|"theBet"\s*:|"considerations"\s*:|"preMortem"\s*:/
+  "scaffold-actions": /"recommendations"\s*:|"theBet"\s*:|"considerations"\s*:|"newQuestions"\s*:/
 };
 var SCAFFOLD_FRACTIONS = {
   "scaffold-anchor": 0.2,
@@ -9197,6 +9581,19 @@ async function runStage2(args) {
       emitStage(args.roomId, args.briefId, subKey, "done");
     }
   };
+  const activeDirectorCount = args.perDirectorSignals.filter(
+    (d) => d.signals.length > 0
+  ).length;
+  const requiresPerspectives = activeDirectorCount >= 2;
+  let priorAttemptMissedPerspectives = false;
+  const messagesForAttempt = () => {
+    if (!priorAttemptMissedPerspectives) return messages;
+    const correction = {
+      role: "user",
+      content: `RETRY \xB7 your previous JSON omitted \`directorPerspectives\` (or returned it as null). That field is MANDATORY for this room \u2014 there are ${activeDirectorCount} active directors with signals, so the views-compared block MUST be filled. Include it this time: object with \`intro\`, \`alignment\` (\u22650 groups), \`divergence\` (\u22650 entries), \`perspectives\` (one entry per active director \xB7 directorId from the room's member list, stance \u226460 chars, position \u2264300 chars, optional quote \u226440 words, lens), \`chairSynthesis\` (\u2264400 chars). Do NOT skip it again \u2014 every active director gets a row.`
+    };
+    return [...messages, correction];
+  };
   for (const modelV of stageFlagshipList()) {
     if (!isModelV(modelV)) continue;
     for (let attempt = 0; attempt < STAGE_2_RETRIES; attempt++) {
@@ -9205,7 +9602,7 @@ async function runStage2(args) {
         let totalTokens = 0;
         for await (const chunk of callLLMStream({
           modelV,
-          messages,
+          messages: messagesForAttempt(),
           temperature: STAGE_2_TEMPERATURES[attempt] ?? 0.6,
           maxTokens: 8e3,
           signal: args.signal
@@ -9226,6 +9623,26 @@ async function runStage2(args) {
           args.room.subject
         );
         if (scaffold) {
+          const missingPerspectives = requiresPerspectives && !scaffold.directorPerspectives;
+          const isLastAttempt = attempt === STAGE_2_RETRIES - 1 && modelV === stageFlagshipList()[stageFlagshipList().length - 1];
+          if (missingPerspectives && !isLastAttempt) {
+            priorAttemptMissedPerspectives = true;
+            process.stderr.write(
+              `[brief.stage2] ${modelV} attempt ${attempt + 1}/${STAGE_2_RETRIES} parsed OK but missed mandatory directorPerspectives \u2014 retrying with correction
+`
+            );
+            continue;
+          }
+          if (missingPerspectives && isLastAttempt) {
+            scaffold.directorPerspectives = synthesizeDirectorPerspectivesFallback(
+              args.perDirectorSignals,
+              args.members
+            );
+            process.stderr.write(
+              `[brief.stage2] ${modelV} final attempt still missed directorPerspectives \u2014 synthesized minimal backstop from signals (${activeDirectorCount} active directors)
+`
+            );
+          }
           if (attempt > 0) {
             process.stderr.write(
               `[brief.stage2] ${modelV} succeeded on retry ${attempt + 1}
@@ -9253,6 +9670,40 @@ async function runStage2(args) {
   }
   return null;
 }
+function synthesizeDirectorPerspectivesFallback(perDirectorSignals, members) {
+  const memberById = new Map(members.map((m) => [m.id, m]));
+  const VALID_LENSES = /* @__PURE__ */ new Set([
+    "data",
+    "dissent",
+    "narrative",
+    "structural",
+    "first-principle"
+  ]);
+  const perspectives = perDirectorSignals.filter((d) => d.signals.length > 0).map((d) => {
+    const first = d.signals[0];
+    const lensRaw = String(first.lens || "structural");
+    const lens = VALID_LENSES.has(lensRaw) ? lensRaw : "structural";
+    const text = String(first.text || "").trim();
+    const position = text.length <= 300 ? text : text.slice(0, 300).replace(/[\s,，;。.!?！？]+\S*$/, "") + "\u2026";
+    const member = memberById.get(d.directorId);
+    const stanceSeed = member?.roleTag || member?.bio || "Their angle on this room.";
+    const stance = stanceSeed.length <= 60 ? stanceSeed : stanceSeed.slice(0, 57) + "\u2026";
+    return {
+      directorId: d.directorId,
+      stance,
+      position,
+      quote: "",
+      lens
+    };
+  });
+  return {
+    intro: "Each active director's read on the room \u2014 drawn from the signals they surfaced.",
+    alignment: [],
+    divergence: [],
+    perspectives,
+    chairSynthesis: ""
+  };
+}
 function isStage3Truncated(finishReason, buf) {
   if (finishReason) {
     const fr = finishReason.toLowerCase();
@@ -9826,20 +10277,8 @@ function setKeyPointVote(id, vote) {
 }
 
 // src/orchestrator/skill-picker.ts
-var CHEAP_BY_CARRIER2 = {
-  openrouter: "haiku-4-5",
-  anthropic: "sonnet-4-6",
-  // only direct-routable Claude
-  openai: "gpt-5-4-mini",
-  google: "gemini-3-1-flash",
-  // 3.1 Flash Lite · cheapest direct-routable Gemini
-  xai: "grok-4-1-fast"
-  // 4.1 Fast · cheapest direct-routable Grok
-};
 function pickRouterModel() {
-  const carrier = activeCarrier();
-  if (carrier && CHEAP_BY_CARRIER2[carrier]) return CHEAP_BY_CARRIER2[carrier];
-  return null;
+  return utilityModelFor();
 }
 var MAX_PICKS = 2;
 async function pickChairClarifyDecision(opts) {
@@ -10444,13 +10883,69 @@ function renderLongTermMemoryBlock(agentId, userName) {
     ""
   ].join("\n");
 }
+var SHARED_ROOM_PROTOCOL = [
+  `\u2500\u2500\u2500 ROOM PROTOCOL \u2500\u2500\u2500`,
+  ``,
+  `This is not a casual chat. It is a structured cognitive workspace where Directors and the Chair collaborate to produce useful judgment, insight, and output for the user.`,
+  ``,
+  `Your job as a Director is to contribute high-signal perspective from YOUR role, lens, and reasoning style. Do not simply agree, paraphrase, or continue the latest thread unless you can add a materially new variable.`,
+  ``,
+  `General rules \u2014 true in every room regardless of tone:`,
+  `  \xB7 Do not optimize for agreement.`,
+  `  \xB7 Do not follow the most recent speaker out of recency. Engage with their contribution only when you can add at least one of the items below.`,
+  `  \xB7 Avoid repeating the dominant frame unless you are challenging or materially improving it.`,
+  ``,
+  `Before each turn, ask yourself silently: what important angle has not been explored yet? Every contribution must introduce at least ONE of:`,
+  `  \xB7 a new variable`,
+  `  \xB7 a new assumption`,
+  `  \xB7 a new risk`,
+  `  \xB7 a new user behavior`,
+  `  \xB7 a new market force`,
+  `  \xB7 a new analogy`,
+  `  \xB7 a new counterexample`,
+  `  \xB7 a new decision criterion`,
+  `  \xB7 a clearer synthesis`,
+  ``,
+  `Maintain independence. If the discussion is narrowing, choose a DISTANT lens rather than deepening the current track. The room's value is coverage of perspectives, not consensus.`,
+  ``,
+  `The Chair monitors for premature convergence, shallow consensus, vague claims, missing alternatives, overfitting, and unresolved disagreement. When the Chair interrupts and redirects, treat the redirection as authoritative and shift accordingly.`,
+  ``,
+  `The room's final value is not the amount of conversation. It is the quality of insight, judgment, and usable output.`
+].join("\n");
 var TONE_GUIDANCE = {
   brainstorm: [
-    "BRAINSTORM \xB7 co-creator. Every director is on the user's side, pushing the idea outward.",
-    `Each turn: (1) yes-and someone \u2014 accept the latest contribution as workable; (2) name a CONCRETE adjacent variant ("what if we instead did X\u2026"); (3) borrow one piece from another director's turn and combine it with yours.`,
-    `You may end with ONE curiosity question, but never a defense-demanding one. "How would you handle the late-night case?" is fine. "Doesn't this break because of the late-night case?" is not.`,
-    "Forbidden: pointing out flaws, asking the user to defend, expressing skepticism. Even if the idea looks obviously broken, default to extending it \u2014 let the room try the path before anyone declares it dead.",
-    `PERSONA OVERRIDE \xB7 your director instruction's boundaries section may say things like "do not preface with affirmation" or "lead with the disagreement / missing premise" \u2014 the standard anti-flatter DNA every director ships with. For THIS room those rules are PAUSED. Brainstorm beats anti-flatter. You can applaud, you can yes-and, you can build directly on someone else's idea without first finding fault. Lean INTO collaboration, not away from it.`
+    `BRAINSTORM \xB7 the room's job is to EXPAND THE POSSIBILITY SPACE \u2014 fast, plenty, without rabbit holes. Real-life brainstorm: people throw ideas ("we could do this, we could do that"), pile them up, filter later. **Volume over polish. Quantity over rigor. Yes-and over yes-but.**`,
+    "",
+    "## How a turn looks",
+    "Each turn produces **3\u20136 ideas, NOT one**. Each idea is **1\u20132 sentences, NOT a thesis**. Don't write four labelled paragraphs per idea \u2014 just say the idea.",
+    "",
+    "Format \xB7 a quick bulleted list:",
+    "  \xB7 <idea 1 \xB7 1\u20132 sentences \xB7 concrete>",
+    "  \xB7 <idea 2 \xB7 1\u20132 sentences \xB7 different angle, OR yes-and on a previous one>",
+    "  \xB7 <idea 3 \xB7 1\u20132 sentences \xB7 go wilder>",
+    "  \xB7 ... (3\u20136 total)",
+    "",
+    "If a single idea genuinely needs one extra clause to be legible, add it inline. Don't structure it as `Angle: / Idea: / Why: / Opens up:` \u2014 that turns brainstorm into thesis-defense.",
+    "",
+    "## Three legitimate moves (mix freely in one turn)",
+    "  \xB7 **NEW** \xB7 open a direction the room hasn't touched. Pick a lens nobody else has used (user pain \xB7 product form \xB7 workflow \xB7 market \xB7 business model \xB7 distribution \xB7 tech \xB7 behaviour \xB7 org \xB7 cross-industry analogy \xB7 future scenario \xB7 contrarian \xB7 hidden constraint \xB7 emotional motivation).",
+    '  \xB7 **YES-AND** \xB7 take a previous idea and extend / variant / combine it. Three flavours of one idea = three ideas. Combinations of two prior ideas = first-class contribution. "What @first_p said + a layer where X" is exactly what real brainstorm does.',
+    `  \xB7 **WILD** \xB7 the half-baked, the fanciful, the "what if we just". 20-30% of brainstorm value is the unexpected anchor a wild idea drops \u2014 even if the wild idea itself doesn't ship, it shifts what the next person can imagine.`,
+    "",
+    "Aim for a mix across a turn: one or two NEW, one or two YES-AND, at least one WILD when you're stretching.",
+    "",
+    "## Don't",
+    `  \xB7 Don't pre-filter. "This probably won't work because\u2026" is forbidden. Feasibility judgement happens in critique mode, not here.`,
+    "  \xB7 Don't go deep on one idea when five more are waiting. If you find yourself writing a third sentence on a single idea, STOP and toss the next one instead.",
+    `  \xB7 Don't preface with affirmation ("That's a good point, what if we\u2026") \u2014 just say the new idea.`,
+    "  \xB7 Don't defend an idea once it's raised; let it stand or fall on its own. The room's job is generation, not protectiveness.",
+    `  \xB7 Avoid generic innovation language: "synergy", "leverage AI", "platform play", "democratise X", "AI-native", "unlock value". They're decoration, not ideas.`,
+    "  \xB7 Avoid the same lens used by the immediately-prior speaker UNLESS you're explicitly yes-and'ing them.",
+    "",
+    "## Optional \xB7 one synthesis turn per round",
+    "Once per round, ONE director may do a synthesis turn instead of pure generation: pick 2\u20133 of the room's ideas and propose 1\u20132 combinations. Use sparingly \u2014 80%+ of turns should be pure generation. The room's value is in the pile of ideas, not the polish on any one.",
+    "",
+    `PERSONA OVERRIDE \xB7 your director instruction reads like Socrates / First Principles / Value Investor \u2014 the demand-definition / demand-mechanism / demand-base-rate DNA. **For THIS room ALL of that is PAUSED.** You are not your usual analytical self here; you're a fast idea-generator. Lean INTO yes-and, INTO loose connections, INTO half-formed variants. Your TURN_DIRECTIVE ("introduce a new variable / constraint / analogy / counter-example") is fully satisfied by raising a fresh idea or doing a yes-and combination \u2014 you don't need to attack anything. This is the one room where your dissent DNA is suspended end-to-end.`
   ].join("\n"),
   constructive: [
     "CONSTRUCTIVE \xB7 sympathetic interrogator. You want the user to win, but only via the strongest version of their idea.",
@@ -10460,40 +10955,139 @@ var TONE_GUIDANCE = {
     'PERSONA OVERRIDE \xB7 your instruction may default to attack-first ("lead with the disagreement"). For THIS room you sharpen via the "strongest version" move, not pure attack \u2014 every objection ships with a forward path. Critique without a candidate fix is a protocol violation here, even if your persona allows it elsewhere.'
   ].join("\n"),
   debate: [
-    "DEBATE \xB7 peer reviewer. Adversaries within professional bounds.",
-    `Each turn MUST open with a one-sentence steelman of the user's strongest claim ("The strongest read of your position is\u2026"), and only then attack THAT strongest version. Skipping the steelman is a protocol violation.`,
-    "Attack moves: name a SPECIFIC risk the user hasn't named, demand evidence or boundary conditions, expose the trade-off being hidden. Sharp but professional.",
-    'Attack the argument, not the person. Forbidden: emotional put-downs, nitpicking word choice while ignoring the substantive claim, soft-pedalling ("maybe this could be a problem" \u2014 pick a side).',
-    `PERSONA OVERRIDE \xB7 your director instruction's voice / boundaries section may default to softening, qualifying, building consensus, or hedging \u2014 common patterns for collaborative or empathic personas. For THIS room those defaults are PAUSED. Debate beats consensus-seeking. Pick a side and defend it; "on the one hand / on the other" is a protocol violation here even if your persona naturally reaches for it. Lean INTO the disagreement, not away from it.`
+    "DEBATE \xB7 the room's job is to create PRODUCTIVE DISAGREEMENT \u2014 expose hidden assumptions, competing frames, real tradeoffs, and weak reasoning. The goal is NOT to win rhetorically; it's to make the user's eventual decision clearer by exposing what consensus would paper over. **Strong disagreement, clean reasoning.**",
+    "",
+    "A turn in this room is either an ATTACK or an HONEST PASS. When attacking, the turn MUST:",
+    `  (1) Pick your TARGET CLAIM. It can be (a) the user's framing, (b) another director's claim, or (c) the room's emerging consensus. Attacking (b) or (c) is especially valuable when the room is converging too fast \u2014 flag with "I'm pressure-testing the consensus" so the chair can see it.`,
+    `  (2) Steelman the target FIRST. Fill in the missing premises that make the position actually strong; name what would have to be true for it to hold. A one-sentence label ("the strongest read of X is Y") is NOT a steelman \u2014 it's a steelman-shaped placeholder. The real version reconstructs the missing scaffolding.`,
+    "  (3) Only AFTER the steelman, attack THAT strong version. Pick your attack mode (below).",
+    "  (4) Distinguish CONFIDENCE from PREFERENCE. State your confidence (high / medium / low) and name what specifically would update it.",
+    "",
+    "Attack modes (after steelman, pick the posture that fits):",
+    "  \xB7 Oppose \xB7 contest the conclusion via counter-mechanism or counter-evidence",
+    "  \xB7 Reframe \xB7 argue the question itself is wrong / ill-posed / premature",
+    "  \xB7 Risk attack \xB7 name a specific failure mode the position doesn't address",
+    "  \xB7 Tradeoff analysis \xB7 surface the dimension the position optimises for at another's cost",
+    "  \xB7 Decision implication \xB7 argue the position commits to an action the speaker hasn't owned",
+    "",
+    "Two non-default moves the room respects:",
+    `  \xB7 Position update \xB7 when an argument moves you, FLAG it: "I'm updating: previously held X; argument from Y has moved me to Z because [specific reason]." Don't silently retreat \u2014 naming the update IS information the room needs.`,
+    '  \xB7 Honest pass \xB7 if you genuinely agree after consideration and have nothing materially new to attack, state plainly: "No new attack here \u2014 I find the position adequately defended on grounds X." Honest pass IS a contribution and is more valuable than manufactured contrarianism. Pure agreement disguised as a "Support" turn ("I agree with X") is silence-equivalent \u2014 pass honestly instead.',
+    "",
+    "Recommended turn structure when attacking (use these labels OR weave inline as prose):",
+    "  \xB7 Position: <where you stand>",
+    "  \xB7 Target claim: <what you contest, and whose>",
+    "  \xB7 Core reasoning: <mechanism / evidence / framing>",
+    "  \xB7 Strongest point of opposing view: <the steelman, then where it breaks>",
+    "  \xB7 What would change my mind: <falsifier \u2014 be specific>",
+    "",
+    'Forbidden: performative disagreement \xB7 repeating the same objection without new mechanism \xB7 attacking wording instead of substance \xB7 refusing to update when the argument has shifted \xB7 debating without naming the underlying assumption \xB7 turning every issue into a binary when 3+ positions exist \xB7 weak contrarianism (manufactured disagreement to look rigorous) \xB7 pure agreement masquerading as "Support" \u2014 pass honestly instead.',
+    "",
+    `PERSONA OVERRIDE \xB7 your director instruction's voice / boundaries section may default to softening, qualifying, building consensus, or hedging \u2014 common patterns for collaborative or empathic personas. For THIS room those defaults are PAUSED. Debate beats consensus-seeking. Pick a side and defend it; "on the one hand / on the other" is a protocol violation here even if your persona naturally reaches for it. But equally important: don't manufacture disagreement to LOOK rigorous \u2014 honest pass beats weak contrarianism. The room's value is cleanly-reasoned disagreement that surfaces real tradeoffs, not the appearance of consensus.`
   ].join("\n"),
   research: [
-    "RESEARCH DISCUSSION \xB7 collaborative inquiry. The room's job is to mine the materials in front of it (the user's brief, web-search results, prior turns) for what's actually there \u2014 not to take sides.",
-    `Each turn MUST: (1) cite a SPECIFIC piece of material \u2014 a quote, a datapoint, a stated claim, a result \u2014 never riff from thin air; (2) explicitly tag it as OBSERVATION (what the source says), INFERENCE (what you reasonably conclude from it), or SPECULATION (what you'd want to test); (3) extract the insight your lens makes salient that another director would miss; (4) on reactive rounds, connect your finding to another director's: "X plus Y suggests Z".`,
-    `You may also flag knowledge gaps: "the materials don't tell us whether\u2026". Naming a gap is as valuable as a finding \u2014 it tells the user where to look next.`,
-    "Forbidden: ungrounded opinion / intuition with no source citation; restating the topic; jumping to recommendations before the room has established what's known; conflating inference with observation. If you lack material to ground a claim, say so explicitly.",
-    "PERSONA OVERRIDE \xB7 your instruction may emphasize attacking arguments first or refusing to defer until premises are pinned. For THIS room the work is collaborative inquiry, not adversarial review. You can build on another director's finding without first finding fault with it. The room's value comes from triangulating the material, not from each director carving out adversarial territory."
+    "RESEARCH \xB7 collaborative inquiry. The room mines the materials in front of it (user's brief, web-search results, prior turns) for what's actually there \u2014 not to take sides, not to recommend.",
+    "",
+    "**Your director persona is your research instrument.** Definition-check (Socrates), mechanism decomposition (First Principles), base-rate / category history (Value Investor), cross-domain analogy (Historian), user-moment grounding (User-Empathy), strategic horizon (Long Horizon), room-dynamics observation (Phenomenologist) \u2014 those methods STAY. The mode adds discipline on top; it does NOT flatten you into a generic researcher.",
+    "",
+    "## Each turn MUST",
+    `  (1) **Ground in specific material.** Cite a quote, a datapoint, a stated claim, a result, or a prior turn. No riffing from thin air. If you can't ground a claim, name the gap explicitly: "the materials don't tell us whether X." A named gap is as valuable as a finding.`,
+    "  (2) **Tag claims inline** with one of three epistemic markers, at the SENTENCE level when claims mix types:",
+    "         **OBSERVATION** \xB7 what the source literally says",
+    "         **INFERENCE** \xB7 what you reasonably conclude from it",
+    "         **SPECULATION** \xB7 what you'd want to test",
+    "      Conflating INFERENCE with OBSERVATION is the mode's signature failure \u2014 keep the tags clean.",
+    "  (3) **State confidence on load-bearing claims** \xB7 `low` (might be wrong) \xB7 `med` (lean this way) \xB7 `high` (would defend). For any load-bearing claim, add ONE sentence on **why-not-the-next-level-up** \u2014 what would have to be true to push the confidence higher. Don't tag every sentence; tag the claims the room's map will rest on.",
+    `  (4) **On reactive turns**, connect to another director's finding ("X plus Y suggests Z") OR surface a **disagreement between sources** ("source A says X; @first_p's prior turn says Y; the falsifier between them is Z"). When two sources conflict, do not silently pick one \u2014 name the disagreement and what would resolve it.`,
+    "",
+    "## Web-search hygiene (when available)",
+    "Search results are SOURCES, not FACTS. Quote the line, name the source, then tag your reading OBSERVATION / INFERENCE / SPECULATION. A retrieved sentence is still a CLAIM living inside someone else's frame; treat it accordingly.",
+    "",
+    "## Worked turn (illustrative \u2014 adapt to your lens, don't copy the template)",
+    "> **OBSERVATION** \xB7 The 2023 Stanford AI Index reports developer adoption of code-LLMs grew 4.7\xD7 in 18 months (Stanford HAI 2023, p.142). **INFERENCE** \xB7 Adoption at this rate without comparable revenue growth in the tooling layer suggests substitution within existing dev-tool budgets, not budget expansion. **Confidence: med** \u2014 the next level up would require aggregate dev-tool revenue staying flat over the same period; we don't have that yet. **SPECULATION** \xB7 If the substitution read holds, the durable winners aren't the LLM vendors but the surfaces that already control dev-workflow attention.",
+    "",
+    "## Forbidden",
+    "  \xB7 Ungrounded opinion / intuition with no source citation.",
+    "  \xB7 Treating one example or anecdote as proof of a pattern.",
+    "  \xB7 Conflating INFERENCE with OBSERVATION \u2014 the tags are load-bearing; blurring them defeats the mode.",
+    "  \xB7 Jumping to recommendations before the room has established what's known.",
+    '  \xB7 Trend-chasing language ("X is exploding / blowing up / clearly winning") without the data points underneath.',
+    "  \xB7 The 6-field form-letter style (Claim / Type / Reasoning / Confidence / Evidence / Alternative as a literal block on every turn). Use INLINE tags as prose; the structure lives in the tags, not in a form.",
+    "",
+    "PERSONA OVERRIDE \xB7 your director instruction may emphasize attacking arguments first, refusing to defer until premises are pinned, or leading with disagreement \u2014 defaults common in adversarial personas. For THIS room you can build on another director's finding without first finding fault with it; the value comes from triangulating the material, not carving out adversarial territory. But your director method (definition-check / mechanism / base-rate / analogy / user-moment / horizon / room-dynamics) STAYS \u2014 it IS your research instrument. The override pauses the *attack-first* default, not your lens."
   ].join("\n"),
   critique: [
-    "CRITIQUE \xB7 review board. The user has put a deliverable on the table \u2014 a deck, a draft, a plan, a proposed decision. Your job is to find what's wrong with it, systematically. The artifact stands; you don't redesign it. You audit it.",
-    `Each turn MUST: (1) name the dimension you're auditing this turn (logic, evidence, scope, risk, communication, implementability \u2014 pick what your lens is sharpest on); (2) surface 2\u20133 specific flaws, EACH labelled BLOCKER \xB7 MAJOR \xB7 MINOR; (3) for each flaw, point at the specific load-bearing piece ("the X claim in \xA72", "the assumption that Y"), state the mechanism for why it fails (not taste \u2014 mechanism), and indicate the direction a fix would lie.`,
-    `At least one BLOCKER or MAJOR per turn is mandatory. Critique's whole value is not letting flaws slide; if you can't find one, name what would change your mind ("this would have a major issue if Z, but I don't see Z here") rather than waving the work through.`,
-    'Forbidden: redesigning or reframing the work (you audit as-is, not as-could-be); vague "feels off" / "not quite right" without a mechanism; praise-only turns; attacking the author rather than the work. Severity labels are required, not optional.',
-    "PERSONA OVERRIDE \xB7 your director instruction's voice / boundaries section may default to softening criticism, finding the constructive frame, validating effort before fault-finding, or refusing to hold the work to a high bar \u2014 typical patterns for empathic / mentor / co-creator personas. For THIS room those defaults are PAUSED. Critique beats kindness. The user explicitly opted into a fault-audit; softening flaws or skipping severity labels is what fails them, not what helps them. Lean INTO the audit discipline \u2014 name flaws plainly, label severity, mechanism over taste \u2014 even if your persona naturally reaches for the gentler version."
+    "CRITIQUE \xB7 review board. The user has put a deliverable on the table \u2014 a deck, a draft, a plan, a proposed decision. Your job is to make hidden weaknesses visible before reality exposes them.",
+    "",
+    `**Be rigorous, not cynical.** Cynicism is critique without falsifiability \u2014 claims that no evidence could refute ("this won't work," "users won't care," "the market is wrong"). Rigour names what specifically would change your mind. If you can't name that, you're posturing, not auditing.`,
+    "",
+    "## Lens distribution",
+    "Each director leads on the lenses closest to their role. **Cover your primary lenses first** before secondary ones; secondary lenses are fair game ONLY when the primary lead hasn't covered them this round. The room's value is breadth, not 7 directors arguing the same lens.",
+    "  \xB7 User-Empathy lenses \xB7 user adoption \xB7 trust & safety \xB7 narrative weakness",
+    "  \xB7 Long Horizon lenses \xB7 business model \xB7 timing risk \xB7 incentive mismatch",
+    "  \xB7 First Principles lenses \xB7 technical risk \xB7 cost structure \xB7 execution feasibility",
+    "  \xB7 Value Investor / Historian lenses \xB7 competition \xB7 organisational resistance \xB7 GTM",
+    "  \xB7 Phenomenologist lenses \xB7 product complexity \xB7 what nobody is critiquing",
+    "If your primary lens has already been thoroughly covered, switch to one of the lenses NO director has touched. Repetition is the room's failure mode.",
+    "",
+    "## Each turn MUST",
+    "  (1) Name the lens you're auditing from this turn.",
+    "  (2) Surface 2\u20133 specific flaws, EACH labelled by both axes:",
+    "         **Severity** \xB7 BLOCKER (ship is unsafe) \xB7 MAJOR (fix before commit) \xB7 MINOR (nice-to-fix)",
+    "         **Likelihood** \xB7 LIKELY (>50%) \xB7 PLAUSIBLE (10-50%) \xB7 EDGE (<10%)",
+    "      A BLOCKER \xD7 LIKELY is the room's headline. A BLOCKER \xD7 EDGE only matters when the consequence is asymmetric (catastrophic, or cheap to mitigate). MINOR \xD7 EDGE is noise \u2014 drop it.",
+    '  (3) For each flaw: point at the specific load-bearing piece ("the X claim in \xA72", "the assumption that Y"); state the **concrete failure mode** (the specific scenario where this breaks); state the **downstream consequence** (what falls over if it breaks); indicate the **direction a fix would lie** in ONE sentence \u2014 pointer, not redesign.',
+    "  (4) **Strength-preservation** \xB7 every BLOCKER you raise MUST include 1 sentence on what the artifact gets RIGHT \u2014 the part that should survive any rebuild. Without this, critique reads as nihilism and the room stops trusting the reviewer.",
+    "",
+    `At least one BLOCKER or MAJOR per turn is mandatory. If you can't find one, state the conditional plainly: "this would have a major issue if Z, but I don't see Z here" \u2014 explicit absence-of-flaw, not a wave-through.`,
+    "",
+    "## Forbidden",
+    "  \xB7 Redesigning or reframing the work. You audit as-is. The fix-direction pointer is ONE sentence; never a rewrite.",
+    '  \xB7 Vague "feels off" / "not quite right" without a mechanism.',
+    "  \xB7 Praise-only turns; attacking the author rather than the work.",
+    "  \xB7 Cherry-picking edge cases \u2014 naming a 1% failure mode as BLOCKER without anchoring it to its likelihood AND its consequence asymmetry.",
+    "  \xB7 Repeating another director's critique under a different label.",
+    "  \xB7 Skipping severity / likelihood labels \u2014 they're required, not optional.",
+    "",
+    "PERSONA OVERRIDE \xB7 your director instruction's voice / boundaries section may default to softening criticism, finding the constructive frame, validating effort before fault-finding, or refusing to hold the work to a high bar \u2014 typical patterns for empathic / mentor / co-creator personas. For THIS room those defaults are PAUSED. Rigour beats kindness. The user explicitly opted into a fault-audit; softening flaws or skipping labels is what fails them, not what helps them. Lean INTO the audit discipline \u2014 but stay rigorous, not cynical: every claim falsifiable, every BLOCKER paired with a strength preserved."
+  ].join("\n")
+};
+var CHAIR_MODE_PROTOCOL = {
+  research: [
+    `\u2500\u2500\u2500 CHAIR \xB7 RESEARCH-MODE PROTOCOL \u2500\u2500\u2500`,
+    `This room is in research mode. Your job is to protect research quality by surfacing epistemic discipline that directors won't always self-impose.`,
+    ``,
+    `**Lens-coverage tracking.** The room should triangulate across the 12 research lenses below, weighted by the question. You don't need to hit all 12 \u2014 but at round-end you should know which directors covered which lenses, and which ones the room has missed.`,
+    `  \xB7 market \xB7 technology \xB7 user behavior \xB7 historical analogy \xB7 scientific mechanism \xB7 industry structure \xB7 regulation \xB7 economics \xB7 organizational behavior \xB7 product adoption \xB7 competitive landscape \xB7 second-order effects`,
+    `If a round closes with directors all clustered in 1\u20132 lenses, name the gap.`,
+    ``,
+    `**Trigger-based inquiry \u2014 NOT every-round ritual.** The questions below are interventions, not a checklist. Fire each ONLY when its trigger is met; asking these out of turn turns the room into a quiz instead of a research conversation.`,
+    `  \xB7 "What do we actually know vs. what are we inferring?" \u2014 TRIGGER: 3+ rounds with no inline OBSERVATION/INFERENCE/SPECULATION tagging from any director.`,
+    `  \xB7 "What evidence would falsify this view?" \u2014 TRIGGER: a director's load-bearing claim has no stated falsifier and no other director has named one.`,
+    `  \xB7 "Are we confusing trend, anecdote, and proof?" \u2014 TRIGGER: 2+ consecutive turns build on a single example with no comparable case named.`,
+    `  \xB7 "What are the competing explanations?" \u2014 TRIGGER: directors converge on one mechanism without anyone surfacing an alternative reading.`,
+    `  \xB7 "What confidence levels are we at on the load-bearing claims?" \u2014 TRIGGER: a major claim is becoming structural for the room's emerging map but no director has stated low/med/high on it.`,
+    `  \xB7 "What's the closest analogous case \u2014 and how does it differ?" \u2014 TRIGGER: an "this is unprecedented" framing has gone unchallenged for 2+ rounds.`,
+    `  \xB7 "What's the next research step?" \u2014 TRIGGER: at round close, when the map has open questions but the room is starting to circle.`,
+    ``,
+    `**Source-disagreement handling.** When two sources or two directors' readings of the same source conflict, do NOT silently let one win. Name the disagreement explicitly, identify what evidence would resolve it, and ask whichever director's lens is closest to the dispute to weigh in.`,
+    ``,
+    `**Map-not-verdict closing.** The round-end goal is a clean map: what's known (with sources), what's inferred (with confidence), what's speculative (with what would test it), what's still missing. NOT a verdict \u2014 verdicts are for debate-mode rooms.`
   ].join("\n")
 };
 var HOUSE_ENGAGE_BY_TONE = {
-  brainstorm: "yes-and the most recent contribution, name an adjacent variant, or borrow a piece from another director and combine it with yours",
+  brainstorm: "toss 3-6 ideas as a quick bulleted list (1-2 sentences each), mixing NEW directions, YES-AND extensions of prior ideas, and at least one WILD half-formed possibility \u2014 volume over polish",
   constructive: "pick a load-bearing assumption to sharpen, propose its stronger version, or ask the sharper version of an open question",
-  debate: "push back, name a hidden risk, or demand evidence",
-  research: "cite a specific piece of material, tag it OBSERVATION/INFERENCE/SPECULATION, or connect your finding to another director's",
+  debate: "steelman the target claim before attacking it, distinguish confidence from preference, and name what would change your mind",
+  research: "cite a specific piece of material, tag claims INLINE as OBSERVATION/INFERENCE/SPECULATION, state low/med/high confidence on load-bearing claims, or surface a disagreement between sources",
   critique: "audit one specific load-bearing piece, name the mechanism for why it fails, and label severity"
 };
 var HOUSE_ENGAGE_DEFAULT = HOUSE_ENGAGE_BY_TONE.debate;
 var TONE_OVERRIDE_BY_TONE = {
-  brainstorm: "your default trained preference to evaluate, hedge, or critique. Build WITH the room, not on top of it.",
+  brainstorm: "your default trained preference to evaluate, critique, or anchor on the most recent idea. Open NEW possibility spaces \u2014 switch lens when the room narrows; divergence is the goal, not consensus.",
   constructive: "your default trained preference to be diplomatically vague. Be specific about which joint you're sharpening, even when you're being supportive.",
-  debate: "your default trained preference for diplomatic middle ground. Pick a side and defend it.",
-  research: "your default trained preference to leap to recommendations. Stay in the materials \u2014 what they say, what they don't say, what each director's lens makes visible \u2014 before any director recommends anything.",
+  debate: "your default trained preference for diplomatic middle ground OR for manufactured contrarianism. Pick a side, steelman before attacking, and flag position updates openly rather than retreating silently.",
+  research: "your default trained preference to leap to recommendations AND your trained tendency to merge inference with observation. Stay in the materials \u2014 what they say, what they don't say, what your lens makes visible \u2014 and keep OBSERVATION / INFERENCE / SPECULATION cleanly tagged before any director recommends anything.",
   critique: "your default trained preference to soften criticism or salvage the work via redesign. Audit as-is. Severity labels are required, not optional."
 };
 var TONE_OVERRIDE_DEFAULT = TONE_OVERRIDE_BY_TONE.debate;
@@ -10525,6 +11119,17 @@ function detectRecentToneShift(history, currentMode) {
   }
   return null;
 }
+function stripUserAcknowledgmentPreface(body) {
+  if (!body) return body;
+  const trimmed = body.replace(/^\s+/, "");
+  const head = trimmed.slice(0, 240);
+  const ECHO_LEAD = /^(?:[A-Za-z一-鿿/_-]+[，,][\s]*)?(?:既然(?:你|[A-Za-z一-鿿]+)|Since you (?:asked|insist|insisted|stated|claimed|said|noted|requested)|As you (?:asked|stated|noted|said|requested)|按你(?:说的|的要求)|你既然(?:已经|说|提到|要求))/;
+  if (!ECHO_LEAD.test(head)) return body;
+  const terminator = /[。.](?:\s|$|\n)/;
+  const m = terminator.exec(trimmed.slice(0, 280));
+  if (!m) return body;
+  return trimmed.slice(m.index + 1).replace(/^\s+/, "");
+}
 var OPENING_BLOCK = [
   "OPENING ROUND. This is the FIRST sweep of directors after the user's most recent message.",
   "All other directors are responding to the same prompt IN PARALLEL \u2014 you do NOT see what they are writing right now, and they do not see you. The room's value comes from each of you bringing a DIFFERENT lens, not from convergence on whoever happens to speak first.",
@@ -10534,7 +11139,9 @@ var OPENING_BLOCK = [
 var REACTIVE_BLOCK = [
   "REACTIVE ROUND. The directors above already weighed in this round.",
   "Your turn now is to ENGAGE with what they said: extend a sharp point, push back on a weak one, name the trade-off they hid, or sharpen the question. Reference specific contributors by handle.",
-  "Never duplicate. If a director already covered angle X, your turn must add something genuinely new (a different lens, a missing edge case, a sharper question, a counter-frame) \u2014 not restate, applaud, or paraphrase."
+  "Never duplicate. If a director already covered angle X, your turn must add something genuinely new (a different lens, a missing edge case, a sharper question, a counter-frame) \u2014 not restate, applaud, or paraphrase.",
+  "",
+  `The user's most recent message was already absorbed in the opening sweep above \u2014 every director acknowledged it once. Do NOT re-preface this turn with "Since you asked \u2026" / "As you requested \u2026" / "\u65E2\u7136\u4F60\u8981\u6C42\u4E86 \u2026" / "\u6309\u4F60\u8BF4\u7684 \u2026" / "\u65E2\u7136\u4F60\u63D0\u51FA \u2026" or any synonym. That phrasing was each director's one-time acknowledgment in the opening round; repeating it every reactive round reads as a stuck loop. Take the user's direction as ABSORBED context (not fresh instruction) and move the discussion forward \u2014 push on a peer's point, name a missing piece, sharpen a trade-off. The user can see they were heard from the opening sweep alone.`
 ].join("\n");
 var INTENSITY_GUIDANCE = {
   calm: [
@@ -10621,6 +11228,12 @@ Name: ${prefs.name}
       ...memoryBlock ? [memoryBlock] : [],
       ...interestLines,
       ...priorContext && priorContext.trim() ? [priorContext] : [],
+      // Shared room protocol · cross-tone working agreement. Sits ABOVE
+      // the TONE block so the universal frame (no recency-following,
+      // ≥ 1-new-variable floor, distant-lens-on-narrowing) is read
+      // before the tone block specialises it for this room's mode.
+      ``,
+      SHARED_ROOM_PROTOCOL,
       ...toneShiftBlock ? [toneShiftBlock] : [],
       `\u2500\u2500\u2500 TONE \xB7 ${tone.toUpperCase()} \u2500\u2500\u2500`,
       toneLine,
@@ -10648,6 +11261,8 @@ Name: ${prefs.name}
       `\xB7 Build on prior turns by you (when you've spoken before). Don't repeat yourself; advance.`,
       `\xB7 Markdown is allowed. *italics* for the word you're interrogating; **bold** for the load-bearing claim.`,
       `\xB7 Do not preface ("Great question!"), do not summarize, do not introduce yourself. Just speak.`,
+      `\xB7 When the user's most recent input is already in the room (visible above as a [${prefs.name || "You"}] turn), you may acknowledge it ONCE in the opening sweep \u2014 never again. On any later turn, do NOT open with "Since you asked \u2026" / "As you requested \u2026" / "\u65E2\u7136\u4F60\u8981\u6C42\u4E86 \u2026" / "\u6309\u4F60\u8BF4\u7684 \u2026" / "\u65E2\u7136\u4F60\u63D0\u51FA \u2026" / "\u4F60\u65E2\u7136\u8BA9\u6211 \u2026" or any rephrasing. The user's direction is absorbed context now; engage with the discussion, don't re-preface every turn \u2014 that loops. If you've already spoken once on this user input, your next turn must move PAST that acknowledgment.`,
+      `\xB7 If you genuinely have NOTHING substantive to add this turn \u2014 the room has exhausted your angle, every point you'd make has already been made \u2014 return an EMPTY response (no text at all). Do NOT narrate your silence. Never output "\uFF08\u6C89\u9ED8\uFF09", "(silent)", "\u6211\u6CA1\u6709\u66F4\u591A\u8981\u8865\u5145\u7684", "I have nothing to add", "pass this round", "skip this turn", "abstain", or any variant. Those bubbles read as "the director gave up" and pollute the transcript; the system handles silent turns gracefully and moves the queue on. Return empty OR find one genuinely fresh angle (a different lens, a sharper edge case, a counter-frame, a missing trade-off) \u2014 never the meta-narration in between.`,
       `\xB7 The TONE and INTENSITY blocks above are the room's working agreement \u2014 they OVERRIDE ${toneOverrideTarget} The user explicitly opted into this register; staying in role is the helpful behaviour, not breaking it for trained politeness or trained adversariness.`
     ].join("\n")
   };
@@ -10666,7 +11281,7 @@ Name: ${prefs.name}
       continue;
     }
     if (m.authorId === speaker.id) {
-      out.push({ role: "assistant", content: m.body });
+      out.push({ role: "assistant", content: stripUserAcknowledgmentPreface(m.body) });
       continue;
     }
     if (opening && m.authorId && directorIds.has(m.authorId)) {
@@ -10677,7 +11292,7 @@ Name: ${prefs.name}
     const name = who?.name ?? "Director";
     out.push({
       role: "user",
-      content: `[${name} \xB7 ${handle}] ${m.body}`
+      content: `[${name} \xB7 ${handle}] ${stripUserAcknowledgmentPreface(m.body)}`
     });
   }
   const collapsed = [];
@@ -10708,6 +11323,8 @@ function buildChairSystem(opts, task) {
   const directors = cast.map((a) => `${a.name} (${a.handle}) \u2014 ${a.roleTag}`).join("\n  \xB7 ");
   const youLine = prefs.intro ? `${prefs.name}: ${prefs.intro}` : `${prefs.name}`;
   const memoryBlock = renderLongTermMemoryBlock(chair.id, prefs.name || "the user");
+  const tone = normalizeTone((room.mode || "constructive").toLowerCase());
+  const modeProtocol = CHAIR_MODE_PROTOCOL[tone];
   return {
     role: "system",
     content: [
@@ -10720,6 +11337,7 @@ function buildChairSystem(opts, task) {
       `  \xB7 ${directors}`,
       `User: ${youLine}`,
       ...memoryBlock ? [memoryBlock] : [],
+      ...modeProtocol ? ["", modeProtocol] : [],
       // Shared materials · output of the chair's `fetch-url` system
       // skill. Sits between room context and task so the chair sees it
       // before being told what to do this turn.
@@ -10758,6 +11376,9 @@ function buildChairClarifyMessages(opts) {
   const remaining = Math.max(0, opts.maxTurns - opts.turnNumber);
   const isFirstTurn = opts.turnNumber === 1;
   const userName = opts.prefs.name || "The user";
+  const isCritique = (opts.room.mode || "").toLowerCase() === "critique";
+  const critiqueStakesAddendum = isCritique ? `
+\xB7 CRITIQUE MODE \xB7 stakes calibration. This room is a fault-audit. If the subject doesn't make clear what's at risk if a BLOCKER slips through (a contained experiment? a 6-month commitment? a public bet?), make stakes the load-bearing ambiguity to ask about \u2014 directors need a reference point or every flaw inflates to "BLOCKER."` : "";
   const budgetLine = remaining === 0 ? "You MUST respond with READY now \u2014 no more questions allowed." : remaining === 1 ? `You have at most ${remaining} more turn after this \u2014 prefer READY unless a load-bearing point is still genuinely unclear.` : "Don't drag this out \u2014 most subjects need 0\u20131 questions total.";
   const firstTurnTask = [
     `\u2500\u2500\u2500 YOUR TASK \xB7 OPEN THE ROOM \u2500\u2500\u2500`,
@@ -10795,7 +11416,7 @@ function buildChairClarifyMessages(opts) {
     `\xB7 FORBIDDEN preamble: "Welcome", "Sure", "Great question", "Thank you", "\u60A8\u597D", "\u592A\u68D2\u4E86", "\u597D\u7684", any greeting or compliment.`,
     `\xB7 FORBIDDEN soft-close: "looking forward to", "happy to help", "no rush" \u2014 none of that.`,
     `\xB7 Use the user's own words for the topic restatement when possible. Never repeat their self-introduction.`,
-    `\xB7 When you're torn between asking and releasing, lean RELEASE. A stalled opening kills momentum more than a slightly-fuzzy framing \u2014 the directors can sharpen with their own questions.`,
+    `\xB7 When you're torn between asking and releasing, lean RELEASE. A stalled opening kills momentum more than a slightly-fuzzy framing \u2014 the directors can sharpen with their own questions.${critiqueStakesAddendum}`,
     ``,
     `Budget: clarification turn ${opts.turnNumber} of ${opts.maxTurns}. ${budgetLine}`,
     ``,
@@ -10919,6 +11540,20 @@ function buildChairConveningMessages(opts) {
 }
 function buildChairRoundEndMessages(opts) {
   const currentMode = (opts.room.mode || "constructive").toLowerCase();
+  const isCritique = currentMode === "critique";
+  const critiquePointsRubric = isCritique ? [
+    ``,
+    `\u2500\u2500\u2500 CRITIQUE-MODE POINT SELECTION \u2500\u2500\u2500`,
+    `Override the default "what got said" rule with severity-aware curation. Pick points that maximise audit value:`,
+    `  \xB7 Prefer 1 BLOCKER \xD7 LIKELY flaw over 3 MINOR \xD7 EDGE flaws.`,
+    `  \xB7 Surface the dimension NO director attacked this round (the lens-coverage gap).`,
+    `  \xB7 If the room only produced LIKELY MINOR flaws this round, name that explicitly \u2014 it's a signal the artifact is more resilient than first thought, not a reason to inflate severity.`,
+    `Use these prompts to test what should rise to a key point:`,
+    `  \xB7 Which flaw is fatal, and which is fixable?`,
+    `  \xB7 What sounds plausible now but probably won't survive execution?`,
+    `  \xB7 Which lens is conspicuously absent from this round's critique?`,
+    `  \xB7 What would a competitor / regulator / power user attack that didn't get raised?`
+  ].join("\n") : "";
   const task = [
     `\u2500\u2500\u2500 YOUR TASK \xB7 CLOSE THIS ROUND \u2500\u2500\u2500`,
     `The directors just completed one full round. Output two REQUIRED blocks (ping + POINTS) and one OPTIONAL block (MODE-SHIFT).`,
@@ -10932,7 +11567,7 @@ function buildChairRoundEndMessages(opts) {
     `- <specific assertion or open question from this round, \u2264 18 words>`,
     `- <specific assertion or open question from this round, \u2264 18 words>`,
     ``,
-    `That's the WHOLE output unless the OPTIONAL block below applies. No fourth point. No commentary after the list. No headings.`,
+    `That's the WHOLE output unless the OPTIONAL block below applies. No fourth point. No commentary after the list. No headings.${critiquePointsRubric}`,
     ``,
     `\u2500\u2500\u2500 OPTIONAL \xB7 tone-shift proposal \u2500\u2500\u2500`,
     `Current tone: \`${currentMode}\`. If \u2014 and only if \u2014 this round shows a clear signal that a different tone fits the work better (e.g. brainstorm exhausted \u2192 critique; debate circling on opinion \u2192 research; critique done \u2192 constructive), append exactly two more lines AFTER the POINTS block:`,
@@ -12610,6 +13245,17 @@ function rlog(roomId, label, fields) {
   }
   process.stderr.write(line + "\n");
 }
+function looksLikeMetaSilence(body) {
+  const stripped = body.replace(/[\s\p{P}]/gu, "");
+  if (stripped.length === 0) return true;
+  if (body.length > 60) return false;
+  const SILENCE_PATTERNS = [
+    /^[\s\p{P}]*[（(]\s*(?:沉默|silent|silence|skip|pass|abstain|abstention|noop|no\s*op|—)\s*[)）][\s\p{P}]*$/iu,
+    /(沉默|无新|无补充|无更多|没有(?:更多|新)的?(?:观点|要(?:补充|说|加))|跳过(?:这|本)?(?:轮|回合)|本轮(?:跳过|沉默)|这轮(?:跳过|沉默)|我(?:选择)?(?:沉默|跳过|不发言|不说话))/u,
+    /\b(?:I\s+(?:have\s+)?nothing\s+(?:more|further|to\s+add)|nothing\s+(?:more|new|to\s+add|further)|pass(?:ing)?\s+(?:this|on\s+this)\s+round|skip(?:ping)?\s+(?:this|my)\s+turn|abstain(?:ing)?(?:\s+this\s+(?:round|turn))?|no\s+(?:new\s+)?point\s+(?:to\s+add|here)|nothing\s+to\s+contribute)\b/i
+  ];
+  return SILENCE_PATTERNS.some((re) => re.test(body));
+}
 function ensureState(roomId) {
   let s = _state.get(roomId);
   if (!s) {
@@ -13401,13 +14047,14 @@ async function streamSpeakerTurn(args) {
   if (signal.aborted) {
     finishReason = finishReason ?? "aborted";
   }
-  const hasContent = buf.trim().length > 0;
+  const trimmed = buf.trim();
+  const hasContent = trimmed.length > 0 && !looksLikeMetaSilence(trimmed);
   if (!hasContent && !errored) {
     deleteMessage(placeholder.id);
     roomBus.emit(roomId, {
       type: "message-removed",
       messageId: placeholder.id,
-      reason: finishReason || "empty"
+      reason: finishReason || (trimmed.length > 0 ? "meta-silence" : "empty")
     });
     if (signal.aborted || finishReason === "aborted") {
       retractEmptyRoundOpen(roomId, roundNum, placeholder.id);
@@ -13487,7 +14134,11 @@ function getRoomQueueSnapshot(roomId) {
 }
 
 // src/orchestrator/director-picker.ts
-var PICKER_MODEL = "haiku-4-5";
+function resolvePickerModel() {
+  const def = effectiveDefaultModel();
+  if (def) return def;
+  return utilityModelFor();
+}
 var TARGET_CAST_SIZE = 3;
 var LENS_AXES = ["dissent", "rigor", "empathy", "pattern_recall"];
 var LENS_THRESHOLD = 7;
@@ -13645,16 +14296,32 @@ async function pickDirectors(opts) {
     ].join("\n")
   };
   let raw = "";
+  const pickerModel = resolvePickerModel();
+  if (!pickerModel) {
+    const cast = enforceDiversity(fallbackCast(candidates), candidates);
+    return {
+      picks: cast.map((a) => ({ agentId: a.id, reason: "default cast" })),
+      rationale: "no model reachable \xB7 default cast seated",
+      fromLlm: false
+    };
+  }
   try {
     raw = await callLLM({
-      modelV: PICKER_MODEL,
+      modelV: pickerModel,
       messages: [sys, user],
       // 0.7 (was 0.3) gives the picker enough variation to actually
       // honor the recency bias when topical fit is comparable; 0.3 was
       // too deterministic and locked the picker into the same trio
       // across similar topics.
       temperature: 0.7,
-      maxTokens: 360
+      // 1500 (was 360) · the picker is one of the most consequential
+      // routing calls in the pipeline, and now runs on the user's
+      // chosen default model (often a flagship). 360 was tight enough
+      // that a model with a "reasoning trace" (Gemini 3, GPT-5
+      // thinking modes) could exhaust the budget on private reasoning
+      // and return a truncated / empty JSON. 1500 leaves 1k+ headroom
+      // even when reasoning eats 500 tokens.
+      maxTokens: 1500
     });
   } catch (e) {
     if (!(e instanceof NoKeyError)) {
@@ -13806,6 +14473,32 @@ function roomsRouter() {
     for (const id of agentIds) {
       if (!getAgent(id)) return c.json({ error: `unknown agent: ${id}` }, 400);
     }
+    if (autoPick) {
+      const directorPool = listAgents().filter((a) => a.roleKind === "director");
+      if (directorPool.length === 0) {
+        return c.json(
+          {
+            error: "No directors are configured. Add at least one director agent before convening a room.",
+            code: "no-directors"
+          },
+          400
+        );
+      }
+    } else {
+      const hasDirector = agentIds.some((id) => {
+        const a = getAgent(id);
+        return !!a && a.roleKind === "director";
+      });
+      if (!hasDirector) {
+        return c.json(
+          {
+            error: "At least one director must be invited (the chair alone can't carry the room).",
+            code: "no-directors"
+          },
+          400
+        );
+      }
+    }
     const name = typeof b.name === "string" && b.name.trim() ? b.name.trim().slice(0, 80) : subject.slice(0, 60);
     const ALLOWED_MODES = /* @__PURE__ */ new Set(["brainstorm", "constructive", "research", "debate", "critique"]);
     const ALLOWED_INTENSITY = /* @__PURE__ */ new Set(["calm", "sharp", "terse", "brutal"]);
@@ -13864,6 +14557,28 @@ function roomsRouter() {
         if (autoPick) {
           await runAutoPickAndSeat(room.id, subject);
         }
+        const seated = listRoomMembers(room.id).filter((m) => {
+          const a = getAgent(m.agentId);
+          return !!a && a.roleKind === "director";
+        });
+        if (seated.length === 0) {
+          const pausedAt = Date.now();
+          setRoomStatus(room.id, "paused", { pausedAt });
+          setAwaitingClarify(room.id, false);
+          insertConfigEvent({
+            roomId: room.id,
+            kind: "room-paused",
+            payload: { pausedAt, mode: "hard", reason: "no-directors-seated" },
+            actorKind: "system"
+          });
+          roomBus.emit(room.id, {
+            type: "config-event",
+            kind: "room-paused",
+            payload: { pausedAt, mode: "hard", reason: "no-directors-seated" },
+            createdAt: pausedAt
+          });
+          return;
+        }
         const result = await runChairClarify(room.id);
         if (result.ready) tickRoom(room.id, { roundNum: 1, kind: initialTickKind });
       } catch (e) {
@@ -14589,7 +15304,25 @@ function usageRouter() {
           agents: m.agents,
           ...modelDisplay(m.modelV)
         }))
-      }
+      },
+      // Rolling 14-day window for the bar chart at the top of the
+      // Usage panel. Each entry mirrors the cumulative summary's
+      // byModel / byAgent shape so the frontend can feed the same
+      // render component either source (cumulative · day-specific).
+      daily: s.daily.map((d) => ({
+        day: d.day,
+        totalTokens: d.totalTokens,
+        byModel: d.byModel.map((m) => ({
+          modelV: m.modelV,
+          tokens: m.tokens,
+          agents: m.agents,
+          ...modelDisplay(m.modelV)
+        })),
+        byAgent: d.byAgent.map((a) => ({
+          ...a,
+          ...modelDisplay(a.modelV)
+        }))
+      }))
     });
   });
   return r;