chore(intake): file pearl pattern-catalog and codex runtime spec as TODOs

Moved three inbox notes into docs/design/ so the task body links survive: pearl's two pattern-catalog handoffs and codex's v0 generic-agent-runtime spec. Added two corresponding TODOs under Rulesets Open Work, both [#C].

1 files changed, 33 insertions, 0 deletions

diff --git a/todo.org b/todo.org
index 4fe67d3..36c45b1 100644
--- a/todo.org
+++ b/todo.org
@@ -1156,6 +1156,39 @@ Reference (dotemacs): =scripts/coverage-summary.el=, =modules/coverage-core.el=,
 
 Origin: handoff from the .emacs.d session, 2026-05-25.
 
+** TODO [#C] Cross-project pattern catalog :spec:thinking:
+From pearl handoffs [[file:docs/design/2026-05-27-pattern-catalog-pearl-notes.org][2026-05-27]] + [[file:docs/design/2026-05-28-pattern-catalog-no-empty-input.org][2026-05-28 follow-up]].
+
+Meta-question: how do good patterns travel from project A to project B? Pearl shipped three worked examples worth capturing — one-prompt picker with typed prefix (pearl-pick-source), magit-transient state buttons, and "no empty input as meaningful" (none-sentinel as first candidate). Each is a small principle with wide surface area; without a catalog, every project re-derives them from scratch.
+
+Open design questions before any implementation:
+- Catalog format — structured (one pattern per file with frontmatter) vs free-form doc
+- Surfacing mechanism — agent-driven (model spots opportunity) vs human-driven (Craig grep-searches)
+- Anti-patterns included or only what worked
+- Intake cadence — every time one lands, or batch review
+- Home — rulesets repo (agent visibility) vs Linear doc vs per-project cross-links
+
+Pearl recommends a one-page spec (problem + design + open questions + acceptance) before implementation. Pearl available to come back for spec-review iterations.
+
+:PROPERTIES:
+:LAST_REVIEWED: 2026-05-28
+:END:
+
+** TODO [#C] Generic agent runtime support — Codex spec v0 :spec:design:
+Codex drafted a v0 design doc for making rulesets runtime-neutral rather than Claude-Code-specific. Motivating cases: offline operation with a local LLM, and two LLMs running in the same project at the same time without trampling each other's session-context.
+
+Spec at [[file:docs/design/2026-05-28-generic-agent-runtime-spec.org]] (moved here from inbox on intake).
+
+Immediate correctness issue Codex flagged: the singleton .ai/session-context.org is unsafe under simultaneous agents. Codex recommends starting with Phase 1 only — add AI_AGENT_ID + session-context.d/<id>.org without renaming the rest.
+
+Broader refactor proposes runtimes/ adapter manifests, generic install commands, language-bundle split (common/ + runtimes/<runtime>/), launcher refactor, local model service via llama.cpp/ollama. Big surface area, six phases.
+
+Before any implementation: needs a real review pass on the spec, and a decision on whether to do Phase 1 alone (low risk, fixes the race) vs commit to the larger arc.
+
+:PROPERTIES:
+:LAST_REVIEWED: 2026-05-28
+:END:
+
 * Rulesets Resolved
 ** DONE [#C] Fix =cj-scan= false positives on cj fences nested inside other =#+begin_*= blocks :bug:
 CLOSED: [2026-05-15 Fri]