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/economic_system_influence.md

@@ -0,0 +1,64 @@
+---
+entity_slug: economic_system_influence
+evaluator: null
+evaluated_at: '2026-02-23T05:17:04.852886'
+overall_score: 2.2
+scores:
+- name: definition_precision
+  value: 2.0
+  max_value: 5.0
+  rationale: The definition is overly broad and vague, essentially describing "the
+    effects of economic systems on society" without identifying any specific mechanisms
+    or distinct conceptual boundaries. It reads more like a general category than
+    a precise analytical concept.
+- name: source_grounding
+  value: 2.0
+  max_value: 5.0
+  rationale: While Smith does discuss different economic systems and their effects
+    throughout Book IV, this entity appears to be a modern analytical abstraction
+    rather than a concept Smith himself articulated. The attribution to "Book IV,
+    Chapter 0" is problematic since Book IV doesn't have a Chapter 0.
+- name: domain_placement
+  value: 3.0
+  max_value: 5.0
+  rationale: '"General Theory" is appropriate given the broad, abstract nature of
+    this concept, though the entity is so general it could arguably fit in multiple
+    domains. The placement reflects the entity''s lack of specificity rather than
+    clear conceptual boundaries.'
+- name: vsm_relevance
+  value: 2.0
+  max_value: 5.0
+  rationale: "This entity is too abstract and general to map meaningfully to any specific\
+    \ VSM system\u2014it could theoretically relate to all systems (S1-S5) but provides\
+    \ no clear structural insight. It lacks the specificity needed for useful VSM\
+    \ analysis."
+- name: explanatory_value
+  value: 2.0
+  max_value: 5.0
+  rationale: The entity merely names a very general phenomenon (economic systems have
+    effects) without illuminating any specific mechanisms, causal relationships, or
+    structural principles that would advance understanding of political economy. It
+    adds little beyond stating the obvious.
+---
+
+# Evaluation: Economic System Influence
+
+## definition_precision — 2.0 / 5.0
+
+The definition is overly broad and vague, essentially describing "the effects of economic systems on society" without identifying any specific mechanisms or distinct conceptual boundaries. It reads more like a general category than a precise analytical concept.
+
+## source_grounding — 2.0 / 5.0
+
+While Smith does discuss different economic systems and their effects throughout Book IV, this entity appears to be a modern analytical abstraction rather than a concept Smith himself articulated. The attribution to "Book IV, Chapter 0" is problematic since Book IV doesn't have a Chapter 0.
+
+## domain_placement — 3.0 / 5.0
+
+"General Theory" is appropriate given the broad, abstract nature of this concept, though the entity is so general it could arguably fit in multiple domains. The placement reflects the entity's lack of specificity rather than clear conceptual boundaries.
+
+## vsm_relevance — 2.0 / 5.0
+
+This entity is too abstract and general to map meaningfully to any specific VSM system—it could theoretically relate to all systems (S1-S5) but provides no clear structural insight. It lacks the specificity needed for useful VSM analysis.
+
+## explanatory_value — 2.0 / 5.0
+
+The entity merely names a very general phenomenon (economic systems have effects) without illuminating any specific mechanisms, causal relationships, or structural principles that would advance understanding of political economy. It adds little beyond stating the obvious.