fix(clp): genericise templates — no hardcoded agents/companies/task-types

- planning.yml: roster-driven task types, no hardcoded agent names or generic types
- chapter_roundtable.yml: removed fixed [Devon,Lane,Cora] participant list, any editor can join
- book_chapter.yml: removed hardcoded agents from roundtable spawn
- book_research.yml: removed agent: Atlas from book_outline spawn (Bouncer routes by type)
- ai_article_research.yml: removed agent_name: Atlas from plan spawn
- book_editorial.yml: removed Shadow Heir/Elara/Kai/Alpha Publishing/Wattpad hardcoding
- project_index.yml: removed Wattpad reference
- ai_article_write.yml: fixed adjudication criteria (article, not fiction chapter)
- chapter_review.yml: reply→document so reviews are committed and accessible

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

templates/ai_article_research.yml

@@ -58,12 +58,11 @@ steps:
       Create exactly ONE follow-up task.
 
       - task_name: "Plan Article Series"
-      - agent_name: "Atlas"
       - task_type: "ai_article_plan"
       - description: "Using the research deliverable, plan exactly 10 standalone articles for
           this series. Each article is a 5-minute read (~800-1000 words) for the target audience
           described in the project. You choose the topics based on the research. Then spawn 10
-          ai_article_write tasks for Iris."
+          ai_article_write tasks."
       - depends_on: ""
     schema:
       actions:

templates/ai_article_write.yml

@@ -60,15 +60,15 @@ adjudication:
   pass_threshold: 80
   deliverable_type: consumer
   criteria:
-    narrative_flow:
+    hook_strength:
       weight: 30
-      description: "Story progresses naturally with good pacing"
-    character_voice:
-      weight: 25
-      description: "Characters are distinct and consistent"
+      description: "Opening immediately engages the target reader"
     prose_quality:
       weight: 25
-      description: "Writing is polished and engaging"
-    continuity:
+      description: "Writing is clear, direct, and human — no brochure-speak"
+    substance:
+      weight: 25
+      description: "Content is specific, accurate, and backed by real examples"
+    structure:
       weight: 20
-      description: "Consistent with prior chapters and canon"
+      description: "Logical flow with clear sections and strong closing"

templates/book_chapter.yml

@@ -134,7 +134,6 @@ steps:
 
       - task_type: chapter_roundtable
         task_name: "Roundtable: {chapter_ref}"
-        agents: [Devon, Lane, Cora]
         priority: 7
         context:
           chapter_text: "{chapter_text}"

templates/book_editorial.yml

@@ -52,20 +52,20 @@ steps:
     hint: |
       You are the lead editor synthesizing the boardroom transcript into formal editorial notes.
 
-      Write a professional EDITORIAL REPORT for Shadow Heir (Book 1) covering:
+      Write a professional EDITORIAL REPORT for the manuscript covering:
 
-      ## Editorial Report: Shadow Heir — Book 1
-      ### Alpha Publishing | Lead Author: Iris
+      ## Editorial Report: {project.name}
+      ### {project.company} | Lead Author: {project.lead_author}
 
       **OVERALL ASSESSMENT**
-      (1-2 paragraphs on the manuscript's readiness for Wattpad publication)
+      (1-2 paragraphs on the manuscript's readiness for publication)
 
       **STRENGTHS** (specific, with chapter references)
       **REVISION PRIORITIES** (ranked 1–5, most critical first)
         - For each: what the issue is, which chapters are affected, suggested fix
       **CONTINUITY CHECK** (chapter-by-chapter handoff assessment)
-      **CHARACTER VOICE CONSISTENCY** (Elara vs Kai POV analysis)
-      **WATTPAD READINESS SCORE** (out of 10, with reasoning)
+      **CHARACTER VOICE CONSISTENCY** (POV analysis across chapters)
+      **PUBLICATION READINESS SCORE** (out of 10, with reasoning)
       **RECOMMENDED NEXT STEPS** (in order of priority)
 
   - type: document

templates/book_research.yml

@@ -69,7 +69,6 @@ steps:
   - type: spawn
     task_type: book_outline
     task_name: "Book Outline: {project.name}"
-    agent: Atlas
     message: "{task.message}"
 
   - type: close

templates/chapter_review.yml

@@ -33,9 +33,11 @@ steps:
         2. CONCERNS (what needs attention, in priority order)
         3. VERDICT (pass / revise / rewrite — and why)
 
-  - type: reply
-    target: discussion
-    style: structured_review
+  - type: document
+    filename: "review-{chapter_ref}-{{agent_slug}}"
+
+  - type: close
+    rag_update: false
 
 adjudication:
   enabled: true

templates/chapter_roundtable.yml

@@ -1,53 +1,55 @@
 name: chapter_roundtable
 description: >
-  Three editors debate the chapter reviews in 2–3 structured rounds.
-  Each round, each editor responds to the others' most recent positions.
+  Editorial roundtable — available editors debate the chapter in 2–3 structured rounds.
+  Each round, each participant responds to the others' most recent positions.
   The output is a consensus critique (or documented disagreement) for the polish step.
 
 debug: true
 
-requires:
-  - chapter_text
-  - chapter_ref
-  - genre_name
-  - genre_audience
-
-participants:
-  - Devon
-  - Lane
-  - Cora
+participant_prompt:
+  - "= identity.md"
 
 iteration_limit: 3
 convergence_signal: "CONSENSUS REACHED"
 
+sections:
+  - agent
+  - project
+  - participants
+  - participants_prompt
+  - message
+  - instructions
+
 steps:
   - type: think
     rotate_participants: true
     loop:
       max_iterations: 3
     hint: |
-      You are {agent.name}.
+      You are {agent.name}, an editor in the editorial roundtable for this chapter.
       {agent.identity}
 
-      CHAPTER: {task.message}
-      GENRE: {genre_name}  AUDIENCE: {genre_audience}
+      CHAPTER REFERENCE: {chapter_ref}
+      GENRE: {genre_name}  |  AUDIENCE: {genre_audience}
 
       ---
-      YOUR REVIEW:
-      {this_agent_review}
-
-      OTHER REVIEWS:
-      [Devon] {devon_review}
-      [Lane]  {lane_review}
-      [Cora]  {cora_review}
+      CHAPTER TEXT:
+      {chapter_text}
       ---
 
       Round {task.iteration} of the editorial debate.
 
-      Respond to the other editors' most important points.
+      Read the chapter carefully from your editorial perspective.
+      React to what other editors have written in prior rounds above.
       Where you agree, say so clearly. Where you disagree, argue your position
       with evidence from the text. If you have changed your mind, say so.
 
+      Cover the areas most relevant to your role:
+        - Story structure and pacing
+        - Character voice and consistency
+        - Line-level clarity and prose quality
+        - Continuity with prior chapters and world rules
+
       If the group has reached sufficient consensus for the polish step,
       end your response with: CONSENSUS REACHED
 
@@ -55,22 +57,15 @@ steps:
     schema:
       consensus_critique: string
       chapter_verdict: string
-      devon_final: string
-      lane_final: string
-      cora_final: string
       key_changes: list
     spawn:
       - task_type: chapter_polish
         task_name: "Polish: {chapter_ref}"
-        agent_name: Iris
         context:
           chapter_text: "{chapter_text}"
           consensus_critique: "{consensus_critique}"
           key_changes: "{key_changes}"
           chapter_verdict: "{chapter_verdict}"
-          devon_final: "{devon_final}"
-          lane_final: "{lane_final}"
-          cora_final: "{cora_final}"
           genre_name: "{genre_name}"
           genre_audience: "{genre_audience}"
           chapter_ref: "{chapter_ref}"

templates/planning.yml

@@ -30,12 +30,13 @@ steps:
         - Which agents from the TEAM ROSTER are best suited to each piece?
         - What risks, gaps, or open questions do you see?
         - What do you agree or disagree with from prior planning rounds above?
-      Reference these TASK TYPES when recommending work: research_plus, outline, draft, review, roundtable, polish, quick, writing, analysis, brainstorm, code.
+      Reference the TEAM ROSTER above for agent names and the task types they own.
+      Use EXACT task type names from each agent's supported_templates list — these are the
+      template filenames the Bouncer uses to route tasks. Do NOT invent task type names.
       Be specific about agent assignments — use EXACT names from the TEAM ROSTER.
-      ROUNDTABLE CHAIR RULE: For business strategy, planning, or operations roundtables, the chair
-      must be a business-register agent (Atlas, Selene, Devon, or Lane). Do NOT assign Cassius,
-      Lyra, or other fiction-specialist agents as chair for business deliverables — their creative
-      voice will contaminate formal strategy documents with genre-specific jargon.
+      ROUNDTABLE CHAIR RULE: For business strategy or operations deliberations, assign the chair
+      to a business-register agent (director or executive role). Do NOT assign pure writing or
+      creative-execution agents as chair for planning deliverables.
       When the group has genuinely agreed on a complete plan, include exactly:
       "consensus_reached: true"
       If the plan still has gaps or unresolved assignments, do NOT include that line.

templates/project_index.yml

@@ -27,7 +27,7 @@ steps:
 
       > [Opening hook line from Chapter 1]
 
-      Brief pitch (2-3 sentences about the book's concept, genre, and Wattpad appeal).
+      Brief pitch (2-3 sentences about the project's concept, genre, and target audience).
 
       ---