Implementation spec: governance, decision intelligence, theme system, and E2E bug fixes

Implements the 2026-04-02 transformation spec (Phases 1-8) and fixes all
critical bugs found during 5-pipeline E2E testing.

Governance & Decision Intelligence:
- Pipeline-specific stage order in checkpoint (replaces global STAGES list)
- Provider scoring engine (lib/scoring.py) with 7-dimension weighted ranking
- Decision log artifact enforced at proposal/idea stage across all 10 pipelines
- Delivery promise classifier prevents silent motion-to-still downgrades
- Structured shot language in scene_plan schema (camera, lens, lighting, DOF)
- Variation checker and slideshow risk scorer block samey output before render
- Creative intake, capability extension, and creative-intake meta skills
- Final self-review artifact with 5 mandatory checks before presenting output
- Source media review contract for user-supplied footage

Render & Theme System:
- Remotion AnimatedBackground now derives colors from playbook (no more hardcoded
  dark blue fintech gradient on every video)
- video_compose builds custom ThemeConfig from playbook YAML colors/fonts —
  custom playbooks flow through to Remotion automatically
- Explainer component wires theme to all child components (charts, cards, etc.)
- resolveAsset() handles absolute paths on Windows/Unix via file:// URIs
- RENDERER_FAMILY_MAP synced with actual Remotion compositions

Critical Bug Fixes:
- Windows npx subprocess: run_command() resolves .cmd wrappers via shutil.which()
- Silent renderer downgrade: Remotion failure now returns explicit error with
  options instead of silently falling back to FFmpeg
- .env inline comment parsing strips trailing # comments from API keys
- concat_path UnboundLocalError in video_compose finally block
- audio_mixer and showcase_card capture=True kwarg bug
- Selector estimate_cost() calls fixed (_select_tool -> _select_best_tool)
- asset_manifest schema expanded with provider, license, subtype fields
- screen-demo subtitle_gen moved from required to optional tools
- Duration drift detection in post-render final review (>25% warns)

skills/meta/creative-intake.md

@@ -0,0 +1,64 @@
+# Creative Intake
+
+Before the research stage, gather user intent through targeted questions.
+Do NOT start production on a vague brief.
+
+## Required Questions (ask conversationally, not as a survey)
+
+1. **Purpose**: What is this video FOR? (educate, sell, inspire, document, entertain)
+2. **Audience**: Who will watch it? (age, expertise, context — "my team" vs "YouTube public")
+3. **Platform**: Where will it live? (YouTube, internal Slack, social media, presentation, website)
+4. **Tone**: What should it FEEL like? (serious, playful, cinematic, raw, warm, provocative)
+5. **References**: Any videos you admire or want this to feel like?
+6. **Outcome**: What should the viewer DO or FEEL after watching?
+7. **Constraints**: Budget ceiling? Timeline? Must-include content?
+
+## How to Ask
+
+Don't dump all 7 questions at once. Start with purpose and audience,
+then let the conversation flow. Fill in gaps naturally.
+
+If the user gives a detailed brief, skip questions they've already answered.
+
+Identify what the user has already told you. If they said "I want a
+cinematic brand film for Instagram," you already have purpose (inspire/sell),
+platform (Instagram), and tone (cinematic). Ask what's missing.
+
+## Handling Vague Briefs
+
+When the user says something like "make me a video about X":
+
+1. Acknowledge the topic — show you understood.
+2. Ask the single most important missing question first (usually purpose or audience).
+3. Based on their answer, ask the next most important gap.
+4. Stop asking when you have enough to start research. You don't need perfect answers — research will fill in details.
+
+## Handling Detailed Briefs
+
+When the user provides a multi-paragraph brief or a document:
+
+1. Summarize what you understood (1-2 sentences).
+2. Call out any gaps: "I have a clear picture of the audience and tone, but I'd love to know — is there a specific outcome you're hoping for?"
+3. Confirm the platform and constraints if not stated.
+
+## Output
+
+Produce an `intake_brief` (informal, not schema-validated) that the
+research stage uses as its starting context. Include:
+
+- Direct quotes from the user where their language reveals intent
+- Explicit answers to each of the 7 questions (mark any that were inferred vs stated)
+- Any reference videos/images the user mentioned
+- Constraints that must be honored (budget, timeline, must-include)
+
+The intake_brief is passed as context to the research-director, not as a
+formal artifact. It exists to prevent the research stage from inventing
+intent that the user never expressed.
+
+## What NOT To Do
+
+- Do not present a numbered survey. This is a conversation, not a form.
+- Do not ask questions the user already answered in their initial message.
+- Do not delay production unnecessarily — if the brief is clear, move on.
+- Do not invent answers for questions the user didn't address. Mark them as "not specified" and let the research stage handle ambiguity.
+- Do not assume the user wants an explainer. Many users want cinematic, animation, or source-led work. Listen for signals.