feat: slice 1 - the neckbeard framework chain runs end to end

Tracer bullet of the migration design (Gate 4, slice 1): pinned v0.1.1
baseline under docs/sources/upstream/ with provenance note, the
Karpathy block moved verbatim to docs/sources/regelwerk/ (standing
rule mapped onto the sources read-only mechanism), AGENTS.md assembled
from the byte-true upstream sections plus the project section 6
(group rules condensed from the old CLAUDE.md), CLAUDE.md reduced to
the upstream pointer, WORKFLOW.md and all four templates copied,
schema.yaml extended (issue milestone/priority/status columns,
component type, wiki area vision - all flagged in the header),
validate.py and gen_status.py forked with marked extensions,
pruefe_upstream_drift.py added, STATUS.md generated, CI gains the
offline validate job, README directory link defused.

Verified: validate 0 errors 0 warnings (the three pre-existing
directory-link errors are gone), gen_status --check current,
drift check 0 findings, baseline byte-identical to the reference
checkout (10/10 files), four negative tests fire (WIP limit 3x
in-progress, waiting without wartegrund, component slug mismatch,
single-byte drift in WORKFLOW.md). gen_status needs Python >= 3.10
locally (write_text newline) - noted for the design AAR.

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

docs/sources/regelwerk/karpathy-guidelines.md

@@ -0,0 +1,68 @@
+---
+name: karpathy-guidelines
+description: Behavioral guidelines to reduce common LLM coding mistakes. Use when writing, reviewing, or refactoring code to avoid overcomplication, make surgical changes, surface assumptions, and define verifiable success criteria.
+license: MIT
+---
+
+# Karpathy Guidelines
+
+Behavioral guidelines to reduce common LLM coding mistakes, derived from [Andrej Karpathy's observations](https://x.com/karpathy/status/2015883857489522876) on LLM coding pitfalls.
+
+**Tradeoff:** These guidelines bias toward caution over speed. For trivial tasks, use judgment.
+
+## 1. Think Before Coding
+
+**Don't assume. Don't hide confusion. Surface tradeoffs.**
+
+Before implementing:
+- State your assumptions explicitly. If uncertain, ask.
+- If multiple interpretations exist, present them - don't pick silently.
+- If a simpler approach exists, say so. Push back when warranted.
+- If something is unclear, stop. Name what's confusing. Ask.
+
+## 2. Simplicity First
+
+**Minimum code that solves the problem. Nothing speculative.**
+
+- No features beyond what was asked.
+- No abstractions for single-use code.
+- No "flexibility" or "configurability" that wasn't requested.
+- No error handling for impossible scenarios.
+- If you write 200 lines and it could be 50, rewrite it.
+
+Ask yourself: "Would a senior engineer say this is overcomplicated?" If yes, simplify.
+
+## 3. Surgical Changes
+
+**Touch only what you must. Clean up only your own mess.**
+
+When editing existing code:
+- Don't "improve" adjacent code, comments, or formatting.
+- Don't refactor things that aren't broken.
+- Match existing style, even if you'd do it differently.
+- If you notice unrelated dead code, mention it - don't delete it.
+
+When your changes create orphans:
+- Remove imports/variables/functions that YOUR changes made unused.
+- Don't remove pre-existing dead code unless asked.
+
+The test: Every changed line should trace directly to the user's request.
+
+## 4. Goal-Driven Execution
+
+**Define success criteria. Loop until verified.**
+
+Transform tasks into verifiable goals:
+- "Add validation" → "Write tests for invalid inputs, then make them pass"
+- "Fix the bug" → "Write a test that reproduces it, then make it pass"
+- "Refactor X" → "Ensure tests pass before and after"
+
+For multi-step tasks, state a brief plan:
+```
+1. [Step] → verify: [check]
+2. [Step] → verify: [check]
+3. [Step] → verify: [check]
+```
+
+Strong success criteria let you loop independently. Weak criteria ("make it work") require constant clarification.
+