The grounded list admits nameable abstract systems

Discussion outcome with Paul: a mediocre material world loses to
excellent abstract craft, but an unanchored "just be beautiful" escape
hatch would hand selection straight back to the model's priors. The
resolution: abstraction enters as named systems with their own grammar.
The derivation now states that the audience's graphic and screen
traditions (notation, publications, identity programs, data graphics,
interfaces) are as concrete a candidate as any physical artifact. The
catalog side of the same decision is a 12-entry abstract-graphic
authoring round in impeccable-site, pending review.

Co-Authored-By: Claude Fable 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>

skill/reference/new-work.md

@@ -41,7 +41,7 @@ The script assigns which structure gets built: your top-ranked structure is what
 ### Create or replace the visual world
 
 1. Name the product's unique mechanism in one sentence, the audience's real scene, its cultural home, and what this first surface must prove. Note the page this category always ships and its predictable opposite; name both as the rut and keep them out of the seven-candidate list, so no die face is spent on the page the category already ships.
-2. From that cultural world, list seven concrete visual systems, artifacts, places, or rituals the audience knows by heart, each with one line on why it resonates and can carry the mechanism, ordered by resonance. What would this thing look like as a physical object; what did its world look like before the web? Near-duplicates count once. When more than three of the seven share one material family, the derivation stopped at the subject's most obvious artifact; the audience's world is larger than that, so dig until the list spans at least three families.
+2. From that cultural world, list seven concrete visual systems, artifacts, places, or rituals the audience knows by heart, each with one line on why it resonates and can carry the mechanism, ordered by resonance. The audience's world includes its graphic and screen traditions, the notation, publications, identity programs, data graphics, and interfaces it reads daily, not only its physical objects; a nameable abstract system (a school of poster, a documentation standard, a data-graphic tradition) is as concrete a candidate as any artifact. What would this thing look like as a physical object; what did its world look like before the web? Near-duplicates count once. When more than three of the seven share one material family, the derivation stopped at the subject's most obvious artifact; the audience's world is larger than that, so dig until the list spans at least three families.
 3. Turn that material into complete directions: each joins a reusable visual world to a concrete first-surface experience.
 4. Run `node {{scripts_path}}/concept-seed.mjs --scope direction --mode <mode>` and follow what it prints. The script assigns which direction gets built and deals catalog challengers. Fuse each challenger before judging it: the challenger supplies the form and its system grammar, the product supplies every fact, and clarity wins conflicts. Weigh fused challengers against the assigned direction on exactly two axes, audience identification and product clarity; losing to strong grounded material is a valid outcome, and beating a thin or tool-monoculture list is the point. <!-- rule:skill-concept-procedure -->
 5. Present one direction, fully committed: its world, first viewport, visitor path, signature interaction, cross-surface reach, and honest risk. Offer re-roll with an optional one-line steer instead of a ranked menu; a lineup invites the safest card. Re-roll eliminates every direction already shown, grounded and challenger alike; after two consecutive re-rolls, ask what quality is missing. You may re-roll on your own only on named factual grounds, when the assigned direction cannot carry the product's truth or task; taste is never grounds. The user may re-roll freely, and a user- or brief-pinned direction beats the roll, always. <!-- rule:skill-assigned-plus-reroll -->