docs(brainstorm-with-docs): обновлена документация скилла

- Зачем:
  - README и ROADMAP должны отражать текущую модель скилла без устаревшего handoff.
- Что:
  - удален временный DEV-HANDOFF.md.
  - README уточняет отличие от grill-me и роль grill-with-docs как upstream influence.
  - ROADMAP фиксирует R2/F4 как landed и описывает F1 как cheap frame-challenger.
- Проверка:
  - git diff --check -- agents/.agents/skills/brainstorm-with-docs.

agents/.agents/skills/brainstorm-with-docs/ROADMAP.md

@@ -35,19 +35,22 @@ versioned so it survives across sessions and tools (not just an agent's memory).
   Rationale moved here; `SKILL.md` now carries only a neutral marker. *Principle:
   the shipped skill must not tell a running agent what result the author expects.*
   (New finding, not previously in backlog.)
-
-## Pending decisions
-
 - **R2 — interview relentlessness. Verdict: leave SOFT.** In the live test the
   interview ran long because the *user* kept opening new forks, not from
   over-asking. The real value came from data/code cross-referencing ("never ask
-  what the repo can answer — search first"), not relentlessness. Keep
-  `grill-with-docs` for hard pressure-testing (see F4).
-- **F4 — relationship to `grill-with-docs`.** Live-test boundary that worked:
-  **brainstorm** = when you need *options* and a direction (divergence→convergence);
-  **grill** = when you have *one* plan to pressure-test against docs. Action:
-  document this when-to-use-which in `README.md` (not supersede — not a strict
-  superset; lacks full multi-context).
+  what the repo can answer — search first"), not relentlessness. For pure
+  conversation-only alignment, use `grill-me`; this skill stays softer because it
+  must also inspect context and produce artifacts.
+- **F4 — comparison target clarified.** `grill-with-docs` is an upstream
+  influence, not the main operational sibling: it is intentionally shaped by
+  someone else's methodology and was too narrow for the user's documentation
+  needs. The practical boundary is now with `grill-me`: **grill-me** = pull
+  understanding from the user and sync with the agent, without creating docs;
+  **brainstorm-with-docs** = repo-grounded option exploration plus durable
+  artifacts. Documented in `README.md`.
+
+## Pending decisions
+
 - **F5a — read `docs/agents/*.md` in step 1.** Confirmed by the test: `AGENTS.md`
   / ADRs were the key map (the doc-layout policy lived there, and reversing it
   needed that context). Add to the step-1 read list.
@@ -58,8 +61,8 @@ versioned so it survives across sessions and tools (not just an agent's memory).
 the KPI strip" and never generated the option "maybe a KPI dashboard isn't the
 best teaching vehicle at all" (a guided SQL notebook? a before/after comparison? a
 deliberately-broken dashboard to fix?). The miss was at the **frame** level, not
-the option level — F1 helps within the frame but doesn't question the frame
-itself. v2 must address both levels.
+the option level. The landed F1 rule now adds a cheap frame-challenger every time;
+v2 is about when to spend more effort on full divergent exploration.
 
 **Core tension (raised by the user).** Full divergence is time-expensive but
 high-value. So v2 must be **tiered, not always-on** — spend divergence where it
@@ -68,9 +71,10 @@ pays.
 Proposals (priority order):
 
 1. **Tiered divergence (cost control).** Calibrate divergence effort to decision
-   weight at step 3 (scope). Trivial/reversible → F1 only (one non-implied
-   option). Heavy/irreversible/expensive-to-unwind → full toolkit pass. Directly
-   answers the cost worry: divergence proportional to rollback cost.
+   weight at step 3 (scope). Trivial/reversible → current F1 only (2-3 framed
+   options plus one framing-challenger). Heavy/irreversible/expensive-to-unwind →
+   full toolkit pass. Directly answers the cost worry: divergence proportional to
+   rollback cost.
 2. **Frame-level divergence (the test gap).** Before listing options, state the
    user's implicit frame in one sentence, then generate ≥1 option that rejects
    that frame. "Why a KPI dashboard at all?" is the poster example. Near-zero cost