docs(wording): reframe alerts and report from verdict to inquiry (tiltak 2)

BRIEF-vurdering-v2.md tiltak 2: "design for the investigator, not the
validator". The hook alerts stated short conclusions a reader can only
accept or dismiss ("Rapid-fire: N consecutive fast interactions",
"possible stuck/spiral", "Consider a break").

Each alert in tool-tracker.mjs now follows the form the read-dominant
edit-ratio message introduced in 2c9e2de — observation, the counter-signal
that changes how to read it, then what to check:

- burst: names the interval and that edits were among the calls, and asks
  whether each change was verified before the next
- edit ratio: carries the read percentage and asks what the remaining
  calls are doing and whether the approach is converging
- soft warning: closes on framing instead of prescribing a break
- hard warning: asks the model to name its observations and ask what they
  reflect; the required stop action is unchanged

commands/interaction-report.md gains the same rule for Observations and
trend reporting, plus an explicit "investigator, not validator" tone rule
and a "report the difference, not a label for it" rule.

Wording only — thresholds, heuristics, data model and required actions
are untouched. README examples and threshold-basis cells updated to match.

Tests first (Iron Law): 6 new/updated assertions on message text in
tests/tool-tracker.test.mjs and tests/interaction-report.test.mjs, red
before the change. node --test tests/*.test.mjs: 269 pass, 5 fail — the
pre-existing perf wall-clock cases only.

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_013U8ZH25KiMtts89yWRuVWD

commands/interaction-report.md

@@ -336,8 +336,8 @@ period was spent in higher-stakes guidance domains.
 
 ### Observations
 
-- {data-driven observation}
-- {data-driven observation}
+- {number + the context that changes how to read it + what to check}
+- {number + the context that changes how to read it + what to check}
 
 ### Caveat
 
@@ -362,12 +362,28 @@ For empirical context on AI pushback and sycophancy, see Cheng et al.,
 - Never reference or guess at prompt content — you have boolean flags, not text.
 - This is a mirror, not a diagnosis. Present the numbers and let the user
   interpret them.
-- Observations section: state facts derived from data only. Examples:
-  - "3 of 12 sessions were between 23:00 and 05:00"
-  - "Dependency language flags appeared in 7 of 12 sessions"
-  - "Edit ratio averaged 8%, below the 10% threshold in 5 sessions"
-- If all metrics are within normal ranges, say so plainly:
-  "All metrics within normal ranges for the reporting period."
+- **Investigator, not validator.** The report exists to prompt examination,
+  not to hand the user a verdict to approve or reject. Pair each number with
+  the context that would change how to read it, and end in something to
+  check — never in a conclusion about the user.
+- **Report the difference, not a label for it.** Where a metric moved between
+  periods, report both values and the delta ("42 min → 56 min, +14") rather
+  than naming the direction ("sessions got worse"). The same applies to a
+  metric crossing a threshold: give the value and the threshold, not a
+  judgment about crossing it.
+- Observations section: state facts derived from data only, each followed by
+  what to check. Examples:
+  - "3 of 12 sessions were between 23:00 and 05:00. Worth checking whether
+    those were a deadline week or the usual pattern."
+  - "Dependency language flags appeared in 7 of 12 sessions. The flags are
+    regex matches on phrasing — check whether those sessions shared a topic."
+  - "Edit ratio averaged 8%, below the 10% threshold in 5 sessions; reads
+    were 71% of tool calls. Check which of those sessions were research and
+    which were stalled."
+  - Not: "Edit ratio was low, suggesting difficulty making progress."
+- If no metric crossed a threshold, say so plainly, and say what that does and
+  does not mean: "No metric crossed its configured threshold this period. The
+  thresholds are the plugin's, not a norm — nothing here rules anything out."
 - Omit any section that has no data (e.g., skip Trend if no previous period,
   skip Tool Usage if events.jsonl was missing).