fix: complete spawn chain — market_research→design, design→reviews+roundtable

Closes the two broken links in the incubation pipeline:
- market_research now spawns company_design (Phase 1→2)
- company_design now spawns 4 design_reviews + design_roundtable (Phase 2→3/4)

Also: cleaned up design_review to use identity-driven review instead of IF/ELSE blocks

Co-authored-by: Copilot <223556219+Copilot@users.noreply.github.com>

templates/company_design.yml

@@ -80,5 +80,57 @@ steps:
   - type: document
     filename: "company-design-spec-{{task_name_slug}}"
 
+  - type: package
+    hint: |
+      The design specification is complete. Now spawn four independent reviews —
+      one from each board member — plus a roundtable that depends on all four.
+      The roundtable will reach consensus and spawn the polish step automatically.
+    schema:
+      design_spec: string
+    spawn:
+      - task_type: design_review
+        task_name: "Design Review (Peter): {task.message}"
+        agent_name: Peter
+        priority: 6
+        context:
+          design_spec: "{design_spec}"
+          review_focus: financial_viability
+
+      - task_type: design_review
+        task_name: "Design Review (David): {task.message}"
+        agent_name: David
+        priority: 6
+        context:
+          design_spec: "{design_spec}"
+          review_focus: technical_feasibility
+
+      - task_type: design_review
+        task_name: "Design Review (Sarah): {task.message}"
+        agent_name: Sarah
+        priority: 6
+        context:
+          design_spec: "{design_spec}"
+          review_focus: market_fit
+
+      - task_type: design_review
+        task_name: "Design Review (Elena): {task.message}"
+        agent_name: Elena
+        priority: 6
+        context:
+          design_spec: "{design_spec}"
+          review_focus: operational_completeness
+
+      - task_type: design_roundtable
+        task_name: "Design Roundtable: {task.message}"
+        agents: [Peter, David, Sarah, Elena]
+        priority: 7
+        context:
+          design_spec: "{design_spec}"
+        depends_on:
+          - "Design Review (Peter): {task.message}"
+          - "Design Review (David): {task.message}"
+          - "Design Review (Sarah): {task.message}"
+          - "Design Review (Elena): {task.message}"
+
   - type: close
     rag_update: true

templates/design_review.yml

@@ -21,36 +21,22 @@ steps:
       You are reviewing a COMPANY DESIGN SPECIFICATION produced by the Crimson Leaf boardroom.
       The full design document is in the deliverables above.
 
-      Review the design from YOUR domain expertise:
+      Your review focus area: {review_focus}
 
-      IF YOU ARE SARAH (Market Intelligence):
+      Examine every section of the design through the lens of YOUR expertise.
-        - Does the design actually address the market opportunity you identified?
+      Be specific — reference exact sections, agent names, template names, or
-        - Is the revenue model realistic given the competitive landscape?
+      pipeline steps where you see issues. Generic praise or vague concerns are useless.
-        - Are there market risks the board overlooked?
-        - Does the target customer profile match what the data supports?
 
-      IF YOU ARE DAVID (CTO):
+      The design has 10 sections: Executive Summary, Market Justification, Agent Roster,
-        - Can every step in the pipeline SOP be executed with the proposed template stack?
+      Chain of Command, Template Stack, Pipeline SOP, Revenue Model, Success Metrics,
-        - Are there missing templates or tools that need to be procured?
+      Risks & Mitigations, and Go/No-Go Decision.
-        - Is the template stack minimal (no unnecessary procurement)?
-        - Are there technical dependencies or failure modes the pipeline doesn't handle?
 
-      IF YOU ARE ELENA (Operations Architect):
+      Review ALL of them, but weight your critique toward your domain.
-        - Is the agent roster right-sized (4–8 agents, no overlapping roles)?
-        - Is the pipeline SOP complete with clear dependencies?
-        - Are there workflow gaps (steps that produce no output, or outputs no step consumes)?
-        - Is the chain of command clean (one CEO, clear management hierarchy)?
-
-      IF YOU ARE PETER (CEO):
-        - Is this company profitable? What's the path to revenue?
-        - Is the cost structure lean (agent count, template count, pipeline length)?
-        - What's the single biggest risk, and is the mitigation adequate?
-        - Would you fund this company with real capital?
 
       Structure your review as:
-        1. STRENGTHS — What is solid and well-designed
+        1. STRENGTHS — What is solid and well-designed (cite specifics)
         2. CONCERNS — Issues ranked by severity (critical → minor)
-        3. SPECIFIC CHANGES — Exact modifications you'd make
+        3. SPECIFIC CHANGES — Exact modifications you would make, with reasoning
         4. VERDICT — approve / revise / redesign — and why
 
   - type: reply

templates/market_research.yml

@@ -71,5 +71,19 @@ steps:
   - type: document
     filename: "market-pitch-{{task_name_slug}}"
 
+  - type: package
+    hint: |
+      The market research is complete and documented. Now spawn the boardroom
+      where the full Crimson Leaf board will debate this pitch and design a company.
+    schema:
+      market_pitch: string
+    spawn:
+      - task_type: company_design
+        task_name: "Company Design Boardroom: {task.message}"
+        agent_name: Peter
+        priority: 7
+        context:
+          market_pitch: "{market_pitch}"
+
   - type: close
     rag_update: true