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/graziers_versus_manufacturers_interests.md

@@ -0,0 +1,61 @@
+---
+entity_slug: graziers_versus_manufacturers_interests
+evaluator: null
+evaluated_at: '2026-02-23T05:33:43.774600'
+overall_score: 1.8
+scores:
+- name: definition_precision
+  value: 1.0
+  max_value: 5.0
+  rationale: There is no definition provided, making it impossible to assess precision
+    or distinctness. The entity name suggests a conflict between two economic groups
+    but lacks any substantive conceptual content.
+- name: source_grounding
+  value: 2.0
+  max_value: 5.0
+  rationale: While Smith does discuss tensions between different economic interests
+    including graziers and manufacturers, without a definition or source chapter specified,
+    it's unclear if this entity accurately represents Smith's actual analysis. The
+    concept likely has some basis in the text but lacks proper grounding.
+- name: domain_placement
+  value: 3.0
+  max_value: 5.0
+  rationale: The entity appears to belong in economic policy or interest group analysis,
+    which would be appropriate for Smith's work. However, without a specified domain
+    or clear definition, proper categorization cannot be confirmed.
+- name: vsm_relevance
+  value: 2.0
+  max_value: 5.0
+  rationale: Interest group conflicts could potentially map to S4 (environmental intelligence
+    about competing stakeholder pressures) or S5 (policy-level decisions about whose
+    interests to prioritize), but the entity is too undefined to establish clear VSM
+    placement.
+- name: explanatory_value
+  value: 1.0
+  max_value: 5.0
+  rationale: Without definition, context, or source grounding, this entity provides
+    no explanatory power about economic mechanisms or structural relations. It merely
+    names what appears to be a conflict without illuminating its nature or significance.
+---
+
+# Evaluation: Graziers Versus Manufacturers Interests
+
+## definition_precision — 1.0 / 5.0
+
+There is no definition provided, making it impossible to assess precision or distinctness. The entity name suggests a conflict between two economic groups but lacks any substantive conceptual content.
+
+## source_grounding — 2.0 / 5.0
+
+While Smith does discuss tensions between different economic interests including graziers and manufacturers, without a definition or source chapter specified, it's unclear if this entity accurately represents Smith's actual analysis. The concept likely has some basis in the text but lacks proper grounding.
+
+## domain_placement — 3.0 / 5.0
+
+The entity appears to belong in economic policy or interest group analysis, which would be appropriate for Smith's work. However, without a specified domain or clear definition, proper categorization cannot be confirmed.
+
+## vsm_relevance — 2.0 / 5.0
+
+Interest group conflicts could potentially map to S4 (environmental intelligence about competing stakeholder pressures) or S5 (policy-level decisions about whose interests to prioritize), but the entity is too undefined to establish clear VSM placement.
+
+## explanatory_value — 1.0 / 5.0
+
+Without definition, context, or source grounding, this entity provides no explanatory power about economic mechanisms or structural relations. It merely names what appears to be a conflict without illuminating its nature or significance.