Critic assignment

Read completely kb/work/open-ended-work-economics/curiosity-exploration/README.md, kb/work/open-ended-work-economics/bootstrap-exploration/second-exploration-brief.md, kb/work/open-ended-work-economics/README.md, AGENTS.md and kb/work/COLLECTION.md. These bind purpose, scope, evidence, coordination, acceptance and stop conditions. No code, experiments, implementation, commits, extraction, deletion or library/index edits. No new source destination allocated; return ungrounded literature leads as leads, not source-backed conclusions. Existing grounded Quotes may support claims; source analysis is not support. Only A turn 1 had source mutation ownership. Choose methods and research judgments within scope; escalate purpose/authority changes, return partial on missing evidence/tools. Validate owned result. Distinguish source claims, documentary observations, conjectures and demonstrations; preserve strongest rival, discriminating evidence, recoverability needs and reason for parked alternatives. Keep learning value distinct from task benefit; do not force compression scores, text shortening or service-first admission. Fresh critic turn 4. Read current coordination and both explorers plus prior integrations. Own only kb/work/open-ended-work-economics/curiosity-exploration/turn-04/critic.md; no delegation. Test whether retention requirements follow from actual evidence, whether constructed account comparison is mistaken for progress demonstration, and whether practical advice can expose unseen omissions without impossible guarantees. Separate recovery of bytes, reconstruction of encounter, discovery of relevance, and explanation. What opportunity costs or blind spots survive? Which rival retention/steering account is strongest? Recommend final-turn decision focus, not new framework. 900-1400 words.