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/monopoly_of_sugar_trade.md

@@ -0,0 +1,64 @@
+---
+entity_slug: monopoly_of_sugar_trade
+evaluator: null
+evaluated_at: '2026-02-23T05:55:39.587518'
+overall_score: 4.4
+scores:
+- name: definition_precision
+  value: 4.0
+  max_value: 5.0
+  rationale: The definition clearly distinguishes this as Britain's "near-exclusive
+    control" over sugar imports from West Indian islands, with specific mention of
+    regulatory mechanisms like duties and drawbacks. It avoids circularity and captures
+    a distinct trade control mechanism rather than a vague concept.
+- name: source_grounding
+  value: 5.0
+  max_value: 5.0
+  rationale: The entity is directly grounded in Book IV, Chapter 4, with specific
+    references to the comparison with tobacco monopoly, drawback policies, and the
+    relationship between import volumes and domestic consumption. The definition closely
+    follows Smith's actual discussion of British sugar trade control.
+- name: domain_placement
+  value: 5.0
+  max_value: 5.0
+  rationale: The "Exchange" domain is perfectly appropriate for a trade monopoly that
+    fundamentally concerns the regulation and control of commercial transactions between
+    Britain and its colonies. This is clearly about market mechanisms and trade relationships
+    rather than production or consumption.
+- name: vsm_relevance
+  value: 4.0
+  max_value: 5.0
+  rationale: This entity maps well to S3 (internal regulation) as it represents Britain's
+    regulatory control over colonial trade flows, and potentially S4 (intelligence)
+    in how drawback policies are adjusted based on consumption patterns. The monopoly
+    represents a clear control mechanism within the imperial economic system.
+- name: explanatory_value
+  value: 4.0
+  max_value: 5.0
+  rationale: "The entity illuminates an important structural mechanism of mercantile\
+    \ control\u2014how Britain maintained economic dominance through trade monopolies\
+    \ while using policy tools like drawbacks to manage supply-demand imbalances.\
+    \ It reveals the sophisticated regulatory apparatus behind colonial economic relationships."
+---
+
+# Evaluation: Monopoly Of Sugar Trade
+
+## definition_precision — 4.0 / 5.0
+
+The definition clearly distinguishes this as Britain's "near-exclusive control" over sugar imports from West Indian islands, with specific mention of regulatory mechanisms like duties and drawbacks. It avoids circularity and captures a distinct trade control mechanism rather than a vague concept.
+
+## source_grounding — 5.0 / 5.0
+
+The entity is directly grounded in Book IV, Chapter 4, with specific references to the comparison with tobacco monopoly, drawback policies, and the relationship between import volumes and domestic consumption. The definition closely follows Smith's actual discussion of British sugar trade control.
+
+## domain_placement — 5.0 / 5.0
+
+The "Exchange" domain is perfectly appropriate for a trade monopoly that fundamentally concerns the regulation and control of commercial transactions between Britain and its colonies. This is clearly about market mechanisms and trade relationships rather than production or consumption.
+
+## vsm_relevance — 4.0 / 5.0
+
+This entity maps well to S3 (internal regulation) as it represents Britain's regulatory control over colonial trade flows, and potentially S4 (intelligence) in how drawback policies are adjusted based on consumption patterns. The monopoly represents a clear control mechanism within the imperial economic system.
+
+## explanatory_value — 4.0 / 5.0
+
+The entity illuminates an important structural mechanism of mercantile control—how Britain maintained economic dominance through trade monopolies while using policy tools like drawbacks to manage supply-demand imbalances. It reveals the sophisticated regulatory apparatus behind colonial economic relationships.