docs(spec): «step 0 — explore» som informativ merknad; README lover ikke lenger et manglende eksempel

To operatørbeslutninger 24.08, ingen normativ tekst endret.

method-spec.md §3: en informativ merknad mellom §3-ingressen og Step 1 om at
mandatet kan UTLEDES før løkka starter. ALDRI et niende nummerert steg — et
nummer i samme rekke arver rekkens autoritet, og aktiviteten er ikke normativ.
Merknaden bruker derfor ingen RFC 2119-nøkkelord, får ingen `###`-overskrift,
navngir ingen konkret agent-toolkit (framework-nøytralitets-vakta), legger
ingen kontraktsfelt til og berører ingen søm i §11. Den sier eksplisitt at
ingenting nedstrøms slakkes: Step 1s navigasjonsregler, Step 4s validator-gate
og verdikt-lag-eksklusjonen står uendret uansett hvordan mandatet ble til.

Ordrett «step 0» finnes nå to steder, på to akser som hver navngir sin egen:
examples/nav-golden-escape/README.md:3 («catalog's requirement that step 0's
gate…») og method-spec.md:66 («this specification defines no step zero»).

README.md: bygg-energi-mikro-bulleten lovte fortsatt «a realistic full-scale
example comes later». veglys-fv-soer og tunnel-hauglia er begge publisert og
fyller rollen; setningen peker nå på dem i stedet for å love noe som mangler.

Ordre 20260824T155506Z-3454831118-from-.claude, punkt 1 og 2.

README.md

@@ -37,7 +37,9 @@ specifications alone, without reverse-engineering the reference code.
 - [`examples/bygg-energi-mikro/`](examples/bygg-energi-mikro/) — the first example knowledge
   bundle (OKF / LLM-wiki): one office building, one LED-retrofit measure, with a seed expert
   verdict encoding the realization gap and a golden-suite of expected validator outcomes. A small
-  **dev fixture** for exercising the agentic loop; a realistic full-scale example comes later.
+  **dev fixture** for exercising the agentic loop; the two full-scale bundles below
+  ([`veglys-fv-soer`](examples/veglys-fv-soer/), [`tunnel-hauglia`](examples/tunnel-hauglia/))
+  are the realistic ones.
 - [`examples/veglys-fv-soer/`](examples/veglys-fv-soer/) — an example knowledge bundle at realistic
   scale: a county-road street-lighting portfolio with two candidate measures (LED replacement of
   2 500 of 9 500 HPS luminaires, and adaptive control), a seed expert verdict, the IR projection

method-spec.md

@@ -58,6 +58,19 @@ checker (reasoning) — they judge the same candidate and are never conflated (
 Eight steps. Steps 1–6 happen within one run; steps 7–8 close the learning loop across runs
 separated in time.
 
+**Informative note — exploration before the loop (deliberately unnumbered).** The loop is entered
+with a **mandate**: one project, plus the objective its candidates are generated against. This
+specification does not say where that mandate comes from — a consumer can be handed one, or can
+*derive* one first, by asking clarifying questions, testing framings against the bundles that are
+available, and settling the objective before Step 1 begins. Consumers have called that preparatory
+activity *step 0 — explore*. It is not numbered here, and this specification defines no step zero:
+the loop's steps are 1–8, a number in the same row would inherit that row's authority, and this
+activity carries no conformance requirement — it adds no contract field, and no seam in §11 covers
+it. It relaxes nothing downstream either: however the mandate was arrived at, Step 1's navigation
+rules, Step 4's deterministic validator gate and the verdict-layer exclusion apply unchanged. The
+note exists so that two implementations building the same preparatory stage recognise it as the
+same stage — not so that either is required to build it.
+
 ### Step 1 — Understand the context (navigate, never stuff)
 
 The agent read-context for a project MUST be built by **navigating** its OKF bundle with