feat: port holistic node refinement contract

apps/mcp-server-standalone/skills/node-context-enrichment.md

@@ -1,6 +1,6 @@
 ---
 name: Node Context Enrichment
-description: "Use to rewrite thin node descriptions into natural prose that still makes what, why, and status clear, with dimension review and edge suggestions."
+description: "Use to rewrite thin node descriptions into natural prose that still makes what, why, and status clear, with context review and edge suggestions."
 ---
 
 # Node Context Enrichment
@@ -17,15 +17,21 @@ Replace weak descriptions with a single clean natural description that captures:
 2. Why it is in Brad's graph
 3. Status in Brad's workflow
 
-Also review whether the node needs dimension fixes or obvious edge suggestions.
+Also review whether the node needs context cleanup or obvious edge suggestions.
 
 ## Workflow
 
-1. Load the node and inspect title, description, source, link, metadata, dimensions, and nearby edges.
-2. Search for adjacent context before rewriting.
+1. Load the node and inspect title, description, source, link, metadata, context, and nearby edges.
+2. Search for adjacent context before rewriting:
+   - the node's primary context and its anchor node when present
+   - recently connected project or belief nodes
+   - related nodes with overlapping titles, creators, or neighboring context
 3. Infer the best available "why" from that context.
 4. Rewrite the full description from scratch in natural prose. Do not append to the old text or use labels like WHAT:, WHY:, or STATUS:.
-5. Review dimensions.
+5. Review context fit:
+   - keep the current context when it is clearly the primary scope
+   - suggest clearing context when it is weak or misleading
+   - suggest a different context only when the primary scope is explicit
 6. Suggest 1-3 high-signal edges when obvious.
 7. Update the node once the description is strong enough to be useful.
 8. After the update, tell the user what changed and ask whether they want to refine the important framing:
@@ -34,3 +40,52 @@ Also review whether the node needs dimension fixes or obvious edge suggestions.
    - status / current relevance / workflow position
 
 The user feedback pass is required whenever the enriched "why" or status was inferred rather than directly stated in the node/source.
+
+## Description Standard
+
+Every rewritten description must naturally cover:
+
+1. What
+   - explicit artifact type
+   - creator/author/speaker when known
+   - core subject, claim, or function
+2. Why
+   - why Brad saved it
+   - what project, belief, question, or theme it connects to
+   - if genuinely unknown, say that naturally without inventing context
+3. Status
+   - queued, in progress, processed, not yet reviewed, saved for later, etc.
+   - if unknown, say naturally that it has not been reviewed yet
+
+Max 500 characters.
+
+## Batch Mode
+
+Use batch enrichment when cleaning up many nodes with the same failure mode.
+
+1. Pull a tight node set first.
+2. Group by pattern:
+   - vague imported links
+   - thin quick-add captures
+   - old source nodes missing workflow state
+3. Enrich each node individually. Do not reuse boilerplate "why" text across unrelated nodes.
+4. Return a compact summary of:
+   - nodes updated
+   - context assignments to review
+   - edge suggestions not yet created
+
+## Quality Bar
+
+- No filler phrases like `insightful for understanding`, `relevant to`, or `important for`.
+- No generic summaries that only restate the topic.
+- No invented certainty. If context is weak, say so explicitly.
+- Prefer one compact 3-sentence description over bloated prose.
+
+## Output Pattern
+
+For each node:
+
+- New description
+- Context change: keep / change / clear
+- Edge suggestions: source -> target with explicit explanation
+- One short invitation for user feedback when contextual framing was inferred