weak-agent-test

# Adversarial review — weak-agent harness for docx-cli This harness answers one question: **can weak agents actually use docx-cli to get real work done, and what should we fix first?** It runs the `weak-agent-test` workflow (`.claude/workflows/weak-agent-test.js`), which fans out one weak exercise agent per scenario (Haiku by default — swappable to Sonnet via `args.model`), renders every output with Microsoft Word, grades each against ground-truth criteria with an **opus** judge, and has **opus** synthesize a prioritized improvement report. Exercise agents do NOT self-report tool counts — every tool-economy and token number is **measured** after the run (agents under-count their own calls ~2×, so self-reports were dropped): from the agent transcripts for the Claude arms, from each scenario's `exercise.json` ledger for the local arm. Both roll up into the same Run-metrics table (tokens, wall-clock, tool split, correctness) via `exercise-metrics.ts`. The test corpus is **bundled with this skill** under `scenarios/`, one folder per scenario, named after its key (`scenarios/mnda/`, `scenarios/invoice/`, …). Each scenario folder is self-describing and holds everything that scenario needs: - `task.md` — the AGENT-FACING request, written as a human delegating the work: the goal, the data, the intent — and **no tool vocabulary** (no `docx` commands, locators, or OOXML terms), because discovering which features deliver the outcome is part of what's measured, - `criteria.md` —...