docs(respond-to-cj-comments): add no-cj-token-in-replies rule + child-priority-sync spec

Skill update: refer to processed items as "cj comments" in chat replies, summaries, and todo.org entries — never write the literal token in my output. The reason is search hygiene: Craig greps his files for the token to find pending annotations, and noise from my replies clutters that.

Spec drop into inbox/: child-priority-sync-todo-cleanup.md captures the implementation recommendation for adding --sync-child-priority to todo-cleanup.el plus four open questions (sync direction, opt-out mechanism for deliberately-lower children, auto-apply vs --check, no-priority-parent edge case) Craig needs to answer before wiring it in.

1 files changed, 1 insertions, 0 deletions

diff --git a/.claude/commands/respond-to-cj-comments.md b/.claude/commands/respond-to-cj-comments.md
index b92bf62..3700cf8 100644
--- a/.claude/commands/respond-to-cj-comments.md
+++ b/.claude/commands/respond-to-cj-comments.md
@@ -268,6 +268,7 @@ See `~/code/rulesets/claude-rules/cross-project.md` for the canonical rule.
 - **Preserve the file.** Don't reformat surrounding lines. Don't reorder tasks. Touch only what the comment asks for, plus the comment's own removal.
 - **The user reads the summary, not the process log.** Write summaries that are directly useful.
 - **Public writing gets `/voice personal`. Private writing doesn't.** Don't over-process internal notes.
+- **Don't write the literal token `cj:` in chat replies, summaries, or todo.org entries you author.** Refer to items as "cj comment(s)" instead. Craig greps his files for `cj:` to find pending annotations; my output should not add noise to that search. ("the cj comment at line 442 asked…", not "the cj: at line 442 asked…"; "per Craig's cj comment", not "per Craig's cj:". The token belongs in the source file Craig wrote, not in my replies about it.)
 
 ## Anti-patterns