docs: the README describes the tool it has become

[khaneight]

Stacked on #75. Last PR in the stack.

The README still opened "CLI tooling for a personal knowledge base that an LLM
builds and maintains" — true nine PRs ago.

What changed

• The tagline is what the thing does: clone yourself from your corpus of work.
• A "What keeps it honest" section, which is the part I'd most want a reader
  to hit first. The six safeguards, stated as what they are — lint errors and
  refusals, not instructions an agent can talk itself out of.
• The persona contract, with the review commands beside it, and the fact
  that an agent writes proposed and can never write affirmed.
• The seven-rung ladder, with why learn sits below compile and extend
  near the bottom, and why approval is deliberately not a rung.
• extrapolated in the article format, and why raw/ can never hold it.
• One publishing section covering both artifacts — the wiki for reading, the
  showcase for watching.

Trimmed elsewhere, so a considerably larger product costs 3 KB more rather than
5.

The design doc records where it was wrong

More useful than the ticks. Two calls in #67 did not survive contact:

learn moved below compile. "A corpus read after the fact shaped
nothing" was overstated — compiling a document is the close reading that
makes mining it cheap, and what a thin profile degrades is generated work, four
rungs further down.

review was never renamed to revise. The rename was proposed to free the
word for the human gate. The gate turned out to need a command, not a rung,
and sentinel review reads fine beside a review rung meaning stalled drafts —
the two never appear in the same sentence. Renaming would have broken every
--action review in the wild to solve a collision that did not exist.

That is also why SCHEMA_VERSION stays at 1: everything this stack added to
a payload is an optional field.

531 tests, clippy and fmt clean.

🤖 Generated with Claude Code