Add two structural patterns from the StoryScope study

[jabrahamtech]

StoryScope scored 61,608 stories on how they were built rather than how they were worded, and structure alone separated model writing from human writing about nine times in ten. Two of its findings had no pattern here.

• §3 covers a summary sentence that restates what an example already showed. It sits in section A because the cut is justified on one sighting: the sentence adds nothing the example did not carry.
• §19 covers stock body sensations standing in for emotion. Marked weak alone, since one pounding heart is ordinary writing.

Step 2 now keeps the real titles, brands, places, and dates the source gives, because writers name these about twice as often as models do. It still forbids supplying a name the source lacks.

Old numbers 3-17 shift up by one and 18-25 shift up by two. The writing-sample reference pointed at forced triads instead of the dash rule, so it now points at §9.

Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_01HSoyQS3Hyzq9qjou5wtsKn

[blader]

Thanks for the careful write-up. Renumbering §3 onward breaks every existing reference, and stock body sensations mostly apply to fiction, which the skill doesn't focus on. The §8 reference fix landed in #274. Closing. If you want to propose the example-restatement tell again, a version that fits into an existing pattern without renumbering would be much easier to take.