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/temporary_statutes.md

@@ -0,0 +1,63 @@
+---
+entity_slug: temporary_statutes
+evaluator: null
+evaluated_at: '2026-02-23T06:30:16.010233'
+overall_score: 4.4
+scores:
+- name: definition_precision
+  value: 4.0
+  max_value: 5.0
+  rationale: The definition is clear and specific, identifying temporary statutes
+    as short-term legislative measures for economic emergencies with concrete examples.
+    It avoids circularity and captures a distinct regulatory concept rather than being
+    vague.
+- name: source_grounding
+  value: 5.0
+  max_value: 5.0
+  rationale: This entity is well-grounded in Smith's actual argument from Book IV,
+    Chapter 5, where he explicitly discusses how frequent temporary modifications
+    to corn laws demonstrate the fundamental flaws in the underlying regulatory system.
+    The context accurately reflects Smith's reasoning.
+- name: domain_placement
+  value: 5.0
+  max_value: 5.0
+  rationale: '"Regulation" is the correct domain placement, as temporary statutes
+    are fundamentally regulatory instruments used to modify existing trade laws. This
+    fits perfectly within the broader category of governmental economic intervention.'
+- name: vsm_relevance
+  value: 4.0
+  max_value: 5.0
+  rationale: This entity maps well to S2 (coordination/anti-oscillation) as temporary
+    statutes function to dampen economic disruptions and coordinate responses to market
+    volatility. It also has some relevance to S4 (environmental adaptation) as these
+    measures respond to changing external conditions.
+- name: explanatory_value
+  value: 4.0
+  max_value: 5.0
+  rationale: The entity provides genuine explanatory power by illuminating Smith's
+    methodological approach of using systemic failures (need for constant corrections)
+    as evidence against the underlying policy framework. It reveals a structural relationship
+    between regulatory instability and policy inadequacy.
+---
+
+# Evaluation: Temporary Statutes
+
+## definition_precision — 4.0 / 5.0
+
+The definition is clear and specific, identifying temporary statutes as short-term legislative measures for economic emergencies with concrete examples. It avoids circularity and captures a distinct regulatory concept rather than being vague.
+
+## source_grounding — 5.0 / 5.0
+
+This entity is well-grounded in Smith's actual argument from Book IV, Chapter 5, where he explicitly discusses how frequent temporary modifications to corn laws demonstrate the fundamental flaws in the underlying regulatory system. The context accurately reflects Smith's reasoning.
+
+## domain_placement — 5.0 / 5.0
+
+"Regulation" is the correct domain placement, as temporary statutes are fundamentally regulatory instruments used to modify existing trade laws. This fits perfectly within the broader category of governmental economic intervention.
+
+## vsm_relevance — 4.0 / 5.0
+
+This entity maps well to S2 (coordination/anti-oscillation) as temporary statutes function to dampen economic disruptions and coordinate responses to market volatility. It also has some relevance to S4 (environmental adaptation) as these measures respond to changing external conditions.
+
+## explanatory_value — 4.0 / 5.0
+
+The entity provides genuine explanatory power by illuminating Smith's methodological approach of using systemic failures (need for constant corrections) as evidence against the underlying policy framework. It reveals a structural relationship between regulatory instability and policy inadequacy.