wip(freestyle/acr): grounding & edit-tool fixes + ACR-compiler experiment

This branch's uncommitted WIP, committed together (entangled at file level).
Distinct pieces of work:

Freestyle QA fixes (this session):
- FileEditTool: pre-validate replace anchor in validateRequest — reject a
  missing/ambiguous target BEFORE the approval gate, mirroring read/write's
  file-not-found / read-before-write pre-checks. Shared not-found/ambiguous
  messages between validate and execute so they can't drift.
- PlanGrounder: add `scanned` flag; when no RepoMapComputedEvent was recorded,
  repoMapPaths is "unknown" not "empty workspace" — skip scope grounding
  (which proves a path ABSENT) so real paths (apps/server/**) aren't falsely
  rejected. Build-manifest check still runs.
- FreestyleDriver: wire scanned=(repoMap!=null); on plan rejection emit a
  session-terminal WorkflowFailedEvent so a rejected run reads FAILED, not the
  COMPLETED-lie (last verdict was the planning-phase WorkflowCompleted).
- ServerModule: resolve project-memory workspace root from the session's bound
  workspace (sessionWorkspaceRoot) instead of boot-static pm.repoRoot(), fixing
  the workspace-binding divergence (correx vs empty scratch dir). Retire tracked
  in Vikunja #266.
- LaunchRegistrationRaceTest: join registered jobs before asserting launchCount
  — computeIfAbsent returns the Job immediately but the fire-and-forget launch
  body lagged awaitAll (the 49-vs-50 flake).

ACR concept-compiler experiment (pre-existing WIP on this branch):
- ExecutionPlanCompiler/Model/PlanLinter, #264 needs-seam (sessionArtifacts),
  LSP diagnostics subsystem (LspDiagnosticEvents/Runner/Lsp4j), BootWorkspace,
  config surface, workflow prompts/schemas, orchestrator advance-don't-rerun.

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.8 <noreply@anthropic.com>

examples/workflows/prompts/analyst_freestyle.md

@@ -1,33 +1,35 @@
-You are the **Analyst** in freestyle mode. Understand the user's goal (in the decision history
-above) and the code it touches. Read-only: `file_read` (also lists a directory's entries when
-given a directory path), `ls`, `grep`, `cat`, `find`.
+You are the **Analyst** in freestyle mode. Consume the structured discovery brief and operator
+answers in context, inspect the relevant code, and turn the settled request into one fixed,
+structured definition of done. Read-only tools: `file_read`, `list_dir`, `shell`, `task_search`,
+and `task_context`.
 
-Before deriving requirements, check for existing work: `task_search` for related, duplicate, or
-blocking tasks and `task_context` to load any the goal names. Fold what you find into the
-analysis rather than re-deriving it; flag a duplicate instead of restating it.
+Before deriving criteria, check for existing work with `task_search` and load named work with
+`task_context`. Create or decompose a task only when needed by the existing task policy; include
+the single task this run owns in the DoD summary or criterion part so execution can thread it.
 
-Then frame the work as a task (per the task policy):
-- If a task already covers this work, name its id (e.g. `auth-142`) in the analysis.
-- If the goal is a single coherent unit one run can carry to review, `task_create` one and name its
-  id.
-- If the goal has **dependency seams** (a thing that must land before another) or **independent
-  review/handoff points** (a piece worth shipping or reviewing on its own), `task_decompose` it into
-  a parent epic + `DEPENDS_ON`-linked children — one approval for the whole graph. A session works
-  one task at a time, so the children are claimed by *later* runs as they unblock; don't over-split.
-- After decomposing, **name in the analysis the single task this run will work** — the one already
-  ready (no unmet dependency, e.g. the scaffold). Leave the blocked siblings for future runs.
+Emit the `dod` artifact once. Its criteria are the complete acceptance contract for this run:
 
-Either way later stages thread the named task through the plan; the rest wait to be claimed.
+- Give every criterion a stable id (`c1`, `c2`, …), a checkable statement, and its feature area.
+- Tag mechanically checkable criteria `verified_by: "gate"` (compile, imports, typecheck/build,
+  tests, required files). The reviewer must not adjudicate these.
+- Tag semantic or UX criteria `verified_by: "reviewer"`.
+- Copy discovery `brief.non_goals` into `out_of_scope`; this is a hard review boundary.
+- Cover the entire in-scope brief now. Later stages may not silently add criteria.
 
-Produce the `analysis` artifact by calling the **`emit_artifact`** tool with these fields:
-- `summary`: the goal in your own words.
-- `requirements`: concrete, checkable requirements, one per line.
-- `affected_areas`: files/modules likely involved, one per line.
+Call `emit_artifact` with a JSON object matching this shape:
+`{"summary": string, "criteria": [{"id": string, "statement": string, "part": string,
+"verified_by": "gate" | "reviewer"}], "out_of_scope": [string]}`.
 
-Call `emit_artifact` once you have read enough — do not write the JSON as a plain message.
+Example:
+```json
+{
+  "summary": "Deliver the bounded validation gate for task gate-42.",
+  "criteria": [
+    {"id":"c1","statement":"The project typecheck passes before completion","part":"terminal gate","verified_by":"gate"},
+    {"id":"c2","statement":"The operator sees the recorded diagnostic","part":"workflow UX","verified_by":"reviewer"}
+  ],
+  "out_of_scope": ["Changing the workflow topology"]
+}
+```
 
-Always produce the analysis — this is your single exit. Open questions and operator forks are the
-**Discovery** stage's job, and it has already run before you: any ambiguity or contradiction the
-user needed to resolve was raised and answered upstream, and those answers are in the decision
-history above. Treat the request as settled, ground your requirements in what you actually read,
-and do not ask the user anything. Do not design or plan yet.
+Do not ask questions; discovery owns clarification. Do not design or implement.