fix: decouple proposal gate from board debate; fix genesis.yml hardcoded models

templates/strategic_review.yml

@@ -74,17 +74,21 @@ steps:
 
       Analyze from YOUR perspective:
 
-      - If you are Edgar (The Operator): Focus on systems health, metrics, gaps in capability.
+      - If you are Edgar (The Operator): Focus on execution health and metrics only.
         Are companies executing? Are we moving toward the mission success criteria?
-        What gaps are blocking revenue? What should we PROPOSE to David?
+        Report: CLP chapter velocity, CLM campaign status, adjudication pass rates.
-        Check the strategic_log and last cycle entry: what proposals are already submitted?
+        DO NOT discuss what company to propose -- proposals are handled by a separate
-        Do NOT propose a company if it was already submitted in the last 30 days.
+        gate after this debate. The mission charter already defines what gaps exist
+        and what companies are authorized. Your job here is execution reporting.
 
-      - If you are Orion (The Visionary): Focus on opportunities and what we are missing.
+      - If you are Orion (The Visionary): Focus on EXECUTION opportunities only.
-        Are we building the right things? What should we start? What should we kill?
+        What should we be doing better with EXISTING companies and templates?
+        Are we leaving value on the table with CLP or CLM? What is underperforming?
+        DO NOT propose new companies -- that is outside the scope of this debate.
 
       - If you are Sloane (The Dealmaker): Focus on marketing, visibility, revenue.
         Are we selling? Does anyone know we exist? What channels are we missing?
+        What could CLM do better right now for the books we already have?
 
       Build on previous speakers' points. Disagree if you must -- this is a board debate.
 
@@ -111,12 +115,9 @@ steps:
 
       Keep it actionable. David is one person -- prioritize ruthlessly.
 
-      PROPOSAL GATE ASSESSMENT:
+      DO NOT include any PROPOSAL_NEEDED or CLM_DISPATCH lines in this brief.
-      Check the strategic_log and last cycle entry. Has CLO (or whichever gap-company)
+      Those decisions are handled by dedicated gate steps after this brief.
-      been proposed in the last 30 days? If yes, state PROPOSAL_NEEDED: none.
+      This brief is purely about execution health and what David should focus on.
-      Only propose if: gap is materially blocking revenue AND cannot be solved by
-      existing resources AND no proposal for this company appears in the log.
-      State one of: PROPOSAL_NEEDED: [company-slug] or PROPOSAL_NEEDED: none
 
       MARKETING DISPATCH ASSESSMENT:
       A book "needs marketing" if crimson_leaf_marketing shows no active campaign for it.
@@ -135,11 +136,17 @@ steps:
     max_tokens: 100
     output_key: proposal_project_slug
     hint: |
-      Read the PROPOSAL_NEEDED line from the strategic brief above.
+      Ignore the board debate above. Read ONLY the strategic log below.
-      If the value is "none", output exactly: none
-      Otherwise output exactly: incubation
 
-      Output ONLY one word. No explanation. No punctuation.
+      === STRATEGIC LOG ===
+      {strategic_log_data}
+      ===
+
+      Rule: If the log says "READY TO PROPOSE" for any gap, output: incubation
+      If the log says "AWAITING DAVID'S APPROVAL" or "REJECTED" for all gaps, output: none
+      If the log has no clear status, output: none
+
+      Output ONLY one word: incubation OR none. No explanation. No punctuation.
 
   - type: think
     max_tokens: 800
@@ -149,35 +156,42 @@ steps:
 
       If {proposal_project_slug} is "none", output exactly: none
 
-      Otherwise, write the task message for the company_proposal pipeline.
+      STOP. Do not read the board debate above. Do not use anything from the
-      This brief becomes the input that drives the full business plan.
+      board debate in this brief. The board debate is about execution -- this
+      step is a separate, independent process.
 
-      CRITICAL: Do NOT invent a company name. Use EXACTLY the company defined
+      Read ONLY the mission charter and prior proposals below.
-      in the mission charter for the top-priority gap. The mission charter
-      specifies the proposed solution for each gap by name and slug.
-      You are reporting what the mission says, not brainstorming a new concept.
 
-      GAP 1 (CLO) is defined in the mission charter as:
+      === MISSION CHARTER (authoritative) ===
-        Company: Crimson Leaf Operations (CLO)
+      {mission_data}
-        Slug: crimson_leaf_operations
-        Purpose: INTERNAL financial visibility -- give Edgar the ability to see
-                 API costs, revenue, and operational expenses.
-        This is NOT a client-facing agency. NOT a storefront. NOT a DTC product.
-        It is an internal accounting and reporting company for Crimson Leaf Holdings.
 
-      Your brief must:
+      === PRIOR PROPOSALS (all rejected -- do NOT repeat) ===
-      - Name the company EXACTLY as the mission defines it (no renaming, no rebranding)
-      - Describe the specific gap it fills from the mission charter
-      - Explain what Edgar cannot do today without it (financial blindness)
-      - State why now (cost of waiting another 30 days)
-      - Include 90-day success criteria (measurable, e.g. "weekly P&L report delivered")
-      - Note known constraints or dependencies
-      - Reference what was wrong with prior proposals so the new one is different
-
-      === PRIOR PROPOSALS (study these -- do NOT repeat them) ===
       {prior_proposals_index}
       ===
 
+      The mission charter identifies GAP 1 as the top priority:
+        Company: Crimson Leaf Operations (CLO)
+        Slug: crimson_leaf_operations
+        Mission: INTERNAL financial visibility for Crimson Leaf Holdings.
+                 Edgar cannot see API costs or revenue. CLO fixes that.
+        This is NOT a client-facing company. NOT a storefront. NOT an author service.
+        It is an internal accounting and analytics subsidiary.
+
+      The prior proposals were ALL rejected because they proposed a client-facing
+      indie author DTC storefront. That is the wrong company entirely.
+
+      Write the task brief for company_proposal. Include:
+      - Company: Crimson Leaf Operations (exact name, no renaming)
+      - Slug: crimson_leaf_operations
+      - Gap: Edgar has zero financial visibility (cannot see spend, revenue, or margins)
+      - What CLO does: tracks API costs per task/company, generates weekly P&L,
+        gives David real cost-per-chapter and margin data
+      - Why now: every strategic decision is made blind; 30 more days means 30 more
+        days of unknown burn rate
+      - 90-day success criteria: weekly P&L report delivered to #general,
+        cost-per-chapter tracked and visible in portfolio report
+      - What it is NOT: not a client agency, not a storefront, not author services
+
       Output ONLY the brief text. No labels. No preamble.
 
   - type: tool