feat(example): add per-entity LLM evaluations for 985 WoN entities (S3.3)

Batch evaluation of all 988 entities via OpenRouter. 984 succeeded on
first pass; 3 failed (network errors). eval-summary --update-metrics
written with per_entity_mean=3.9556.

Viability dashboard: 6/6 PASS
  redundancy_ratio   0.0061  (max 0.10)
  coverage_ratio     0.6190  (min 0.40)
  coherence_comps    0.0000  (max 3)
  consistency_cycles 0.0000  (max 0)
  granularity_entropy 2.6748 (min 1.0)
  per_entity_mean    3.9556  (min 3.5)

Dimension breakdown (mean across 985 entities):
  definition_precision  3.62
  source_grounding      4.36
  domain_placement      4.56
  vsm_relevance         3.31
  explanatory_value     3.94

Co-Authored-By: Claude Sonnet 4.6 <noreply@anthropic.com>

examples/infospace-with-history/output/evaluations/colonial_economic_system_comparison.md

@@ -0,0 +1,65 @@
+---
+entity_slug: colonial_economic_system_comparison
+evaluator: null
+evaluated_at: '2026-02-23T04:47:45.488740'
+overall_score: 3.8
+scores:
+- name: definition_precision
+  value: 3.0
+  max_value: 5.0
+  rationale: The definition captures a distinct analytical approach but remains somewhat
+    vague about what constitutes "different approaches" and "more open arrangements."
+    While it identifies the core contrast between monopoly-controlled and free-market
+    colonial systems, it could be more specific about the mechanisms being compared.
+- name: source_grounding
+  value: 4.0
+  max_value: 5.0
+  rationale: This entity is well-grounded in Book IV, Chapter 7, where Smith extensively
+    compares different colonial policies, particularly contrasting the restrictive
+    mercantile system with more liberal approaches. Smith does indeed use comparative
+    analysis to demonstrate how different colonial policies produce different economic
+    outcomes.
+- name: domain_placement
+  value: 4.0
+  max_value: 5.0
+  rationale: '"General Theory" is appropriate as this represents Smith''s broader
+    theoretical framework for evaluating economic systems rather than a specific policy
+    mechanism. The comparative analytical approach transcends particular colonial
+    arrangements to illustrate fundamental principles about economic freedom.'
+- name: vsm_relevance
+  value: 4.0
+  max_value: 5.0
+  rationale: This entity maps well to S4 (intelligence/environmental adaptation) as
+    it represents a systematic method for evaluating and learning from different policy
+    approaches across various colonial contexts. It also touches on S5 (identity/policy)
+    by informing fundamental decisions about economic system design.
+- name: explanatory_value
+  value: 4.0
+  max_value: 5.0
+  rationale: This entity provides significant explanatory power by identifying Smith's
+    methodological approach to demonstrating the superiority of market-based systems
+    over monopolistic control. It illuminates how comparative analysis serves as evidence
+    for broader theoretical claims about economic freedom and efficiency.
+---
+
+# Evaluation: Colonial Economic System Comparison
+
+## definition_precision — 3.0 / 5.0
+
+The definition captures a distinct analytical approach but remains somewhat vague about what constitutes "different approaches" and "more open arrangements." While it identifies the core contrast between monopoly-controlled and free-market colonial systems, it could be more specific about the mechanisms being compared.
+
+## source_grounding — 4.0 / 5.0
+
+This entity is well-grounded in Book IV, Chapter 7, where Smith extensively compares different colonial policies, particularly contrasting the restrictive mercantile system with more liberal approaches. Smith does indeed use comparative analysis to demonstrate how different colonial policies produce different economic outcomes.
+
+## domain_placement — 4.0 / 5.0
+
+"General Theory" is appropriate as this represents Smith's broader theoretical framework for evaluating economic systems rather than a specific policy mechanism. The comparative analytical approach transcends particular colonial arrangements to illustrate fundamental principles about economic freedom.
+
+## vsm_relevance — 4.0 / 5.0
+
+This entity maps well to S4 (intelligence/environmental adaptation) as it represents a systematic method for evaluating and learning from different policy approaches across various colonial contexts. It also touches on S5 (identity/policy) by informing fundamental decisions about economic system design.
+
+## explanatory_value — 4.0 / 5.0
+
+This entity provides significant explanatory power by identifying Smith's methodological approach to demonstrating the superiority of market-based systems over monopolistic control. It illuminates how comparative analysis serves as evidence for broader theoretical claims about economic freedom and efficiency.