task new: einen zweiten Schreibweg in den Tracker (ein Posten, keine Seite, #132)

Files changed:
- CHANGES.md
- VERSION
- docs/knowledge-and-commitment.md
- instructions/wiki-ingest/SKILL.md
- tools/CONTRACT.md
- tools/chemenu/cli.py
- tools/chemenu/commands/task_cmd.py
- tools/chemenu/tasks/protocol.py
- tools/chemenu/tasks/superproductivity.py
- tools/chemenu/tests/test_instructions_cmd.py
- tools/chemenu/tests/test_superproductivity.py
- tools/chemenu/tests/test_task_cmd.py

instructions/wiki-ingest/SKILL.md

@@ -1,6 +1,6 @@
 ---
 name: wiki-ingest
-description: Processes a new source file into the LLM wiki - extracts entities and concepts, creates a source summary page, cross-references, rebuilds indexes, and publishes. Use when the user drops a file into incoming/ or raw/, or says "ingest <file>", "process this source", "add this to the wiki".
+description: Processes a new source file into the LLM wiki - extracts entities and concepts, creates a source summary page, files a tracker item for any commitment the source also carries, cross-references, rebuilds indexes, and publishes. Use when the user drops a file into incoming/ or raw/, or says "ingest <file>", "process this source", "add this to the wiki".
 ---
 
 # Wiki Ingest
@@ -27,7 +27,7 @@ validator complains - and the ticked list is the only record that they happened.
 - [ ] 2. Read the source
 - [ ] 3. Extract metadata
 - [ ] 4. Check what the wiki already knows
-- [ ] 5. Discuss with the user
+- [ ] 5. Discuss with the user (content and any commitment); create the commitment if confirmed
 - [ ] 6. Create the source page (incl. `## Not Extracted`)
 - [ ] 7. Create or update entity pages
 - [ ] 8. Create or update concept pages
@@ -104,7 +104,53 @@ validator complains - and the ticked list is the only record that they happened.
    is exempt from the iteration budget, so ask about every subject rather than guessing.
 
 5. **Discuss with the user.** Present the key takeaways and ask: which points matter most,
-   which entities/concepts to create or update, any specific emphasis.
+   which entities/concepts to create or update, any specific emphasis - **and whether this
+   source also carries a commitment**, something to follow up on rather than only record. A
+   customer complaint, a meeting note with an action item, an offer awaiting a reply: the
+   knowledge side (steps 6-9 below) and the commitment side are not exclusive, and most
+   external sources that are not pure reading material carry both.
+
+   Whether a source is actionable at all, and what its next step is, is the user's call - GTD's
+   own *Clarify* - never a guess from the source's wording alone. Do not create an item on your
+   own initiative; propose one and let the user confirm or correct it.
+
+   **If a commitment is confirmed, resolve its project and create the item before continuing to
+   step 6** - the tracker side settles first, the same order `new project` already holds between
+   a tracker project and its page, so a failure creating the item leaves nothing on the knowledge
+   side to clean up. Search for a likely project rather than asking cold:
+
+   ```bash
+   tools/wikitool search "<likely project name>"
+   ```
+
+   Then put title and project to the user as **one** combined question - "Create '<title>' in
+   project '<name>'?" - never as two separate ones and never as a foregone conclusion. The answer
+   is one of:
+
+   - the suggested project, confirmed as-is;
+   - a different existing project the user names instead;
+   - `wikitool new project` first, if no project fits yet - this itself needs a human's
+     out-of-band step on some providers, so expect to pause there before continuing;
+   - the tracker's own inbox, an explicit, deliberately chosen exit for when nothing above
+     fits - never a default for an unresolved project, and worth naming its cost when you offer
+     it: an item filed there will not appear in `wikitool review`, since every one of its checks
+     is reached through a project name and the inbox carries none.
+
+   Once resolved:
+
+   ```bash
+   tools/wikitool task new --title "<confirmed title>" --project "<confirmed project>" \
+     [--waiting --follow-up-at YYYY-MM-DD] [--notes "Source - <Title>"]
+   # or, for the inbox route:
+   tools/wikitool task new --title "<confirmed title>" --inbox
+   ```
+
+   `--notes` can point back at the source page step 6 is about to create, even though that page
+   does not exist yet at this moment - it is freetext, never resolved or validated against an
+   actual page.
+
+   No commitment in this source? Skip straight to step 6 - the knowledge side runs on its own
+   exactly as before.
 
 6. **Create the source page.** Read
    `kb/sources/COLLECTION.md` first - it holds what this
@@ -228,6 +274,13 @@ validator complains - and the ticked list is the only record that they happened.
 
 - **Subject already has a page?** Update it (step 7, `touch`) instead of creating a second one.
   Two pages on one subject is the failure this step exists to prevent.
+- **Unsure whether a source is actionable at all?** Ask - never guess. A commitment nobody
+  actually made is worse than one that was missed: it looks like a real open item in every
+  later review, and nobody agreed to it. Skipping the item is always the safer default when in
+  doubt.
+- **No project fits the commitment, and none should be created either?** File it into the
+  tracker's inbox rather than forcing a project choice - see step 5's own three-way choice. Name
+  the cost (invisible to `wikitool review`) before the user picks it.
 - **One source names far more subjects than usual?** That is breadth, not volume. It is not
   split into several sources - it cannot be - and it does not get a page per name either:
   `instructions/ingest-large-tree.md` § A broad source is not cut.
@@ -243,9 +296,9 @@ validator complains - and the ticked list is the only record that they happened.
 
 ## wikitool commands used
 
-`raw accept`, `search`, `types describe`, `new source`, `new entity`, `new concept`, `touch`,
-`cite add`, `xref add`, `xref link-source`, `sources coverage`, `sources rebuild-index`,
-`index rebuild`, `log append`, `log status`, `publish`
+`raw accept`, `search`, `types describe`, `task new`, `new project`, `new source`, `new entity`,
+`new concept`, `touch`, `cite add`, `xref add`, `xref link-source`, `sources coverage`,
+`sources rebuild-index`, `index rebuild`, `log append`, `log status`, `publish`
 
 ## Output