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/double_coincidence_of_wants.md

@@ -0,0 +1,64 @@
+---
+entity_slug: double_coincidence_of_wants
+evaluator: null
+evaluated_at: '2026-02-23T05:07:40.388214'
+overall_score: 4.4
+scores:
+- name: definition_precision
+  value: 5.0
+  max_value: 5.0
+  rationale: The definition is highly precise and non-circular, clearly articulating
+    the specific requirement that both parties in a barter exchange must simultaneously
+    want what the other offers. It captures a distinct economic concept with clear
+    boundaries rather than being a vague umbrella term.
+- name: source_grounding
+  value: 5.0
+  max_value: 5.0
+  rationale: This concept is directly grounded in Smith's actual text from Book I,
+    Chapter 4, where he explicitly discusses the limitations of barter systems and
+    the need for coinciding wants. The butcher-brewer example provided aligns with
+    Smith's own illustrative approach to explaining this barrier to trade.
+- name: domain_placement
+  value: 5.0
+  max_value: 5.0
+  rationale: The placement in the "Exchange" domain is precisely correct, as this
+    concept fundamentally concerns the mechanics and limitations of trading relationships.
+    It represents a core constraint within exchange systems rather than belonging
+    to production, distribution, or other economic categories.
+- name: vsm_relevance
+  value: 2.0
+  max_value: 5.0
+  rationale: This entity is largely VSM-neutral as it describes a structural limitation
+    of barter systems rather than mapping to specific VSM functions. While it might
+    tangentially relate to S1 (operational constraints) or S2 (coordination problems),
+    it doesn't naturally align with the VSM's organizational cybernetics framework.
+- name: explanatory_value
+  value: 5.0
+  max_value: 5.0
+  rationale: This entity provides exceptional explanatory power by illuminating the
+    fundamental mechanism that necessitates the development of money and more sophisticated
+    exchange systems. It explains a crucial structural relation that drives economic
+    evolution rather than merely naming a surface phenomenon.
+---
+
+# Evaluation: Double Coincidence Of Wants
+
+## definition_precision — 5.0 / 5.0
+
+The definition is highly precise and non-circular, clearly articulating the specific requirement that both parties in a barter exchange must simultaneously want what the other offers. It captures a distinct economic concept with clear boundaries rather than being a vague umbrella term.
+
+## source_grounding — 5.0 / 5.0
+
+This concept is directly grounded in Smith's actual text from Book I, Chapter 4, where he explicitly discusses the limitations of barter systems and the need for coinciding wants. The butcher-brewer example provided aligns with Smith's own illustrative approach to explaining this barrier to trade.
+
+## domain_placement — 5.0 / 5.0
+
+The placement in the "Exchange" domain is precisely correct, as this concept fundamentally concerns the mechanics and limitations of trading relationships. It represents a core constraint within exchange systems rather than belonging to production, distribution, or other economic categories.
+
+## vsm_relevance — 2.0 / 5.0
+
+This entity is largely VSM-neutral as it describes a structural limitation of barter systems rather than mapping to specific VSM functions. While it might tangentially relate to S1 (operational constraints) or S2 (coordination problems), it doesn't naturally align with the VSM's organizational cybernetics framework.
+
+## explanatory_value — 5.0 / 5.0
+
+This entity provides exceptional explanatory power by illuminating the fundamental mechanism that necessitates the development of money and more sophisticated exchange systems. It explains a crucial structural relation that drives economic evolution rather than merely naming a surface phenomenon.