Rewrite M-series: crypto trading engine + market prediction sims

The initial M-series specs were wrong (text digestion pipeline). Replaced
with the actual economy organ architecture:

  M0  hub (independent system, scoped autonomy, multi-layered braking)
  M1  Marketplace (multi-trader harness, deterministic law script, veto)
  M2  Data Feeds (RSS + live market, bridges Marketplace ↔ Sims)
  M3  Sims hub + 7 sub-specs (always-running, bounded predictions):
      M3a statistical, M3b sociological, M3c AMM/liquidity,
      M3d MEV/adversarial, M3e tokenomics/macro, M3f consensus/staking,
      M3g market microstructure
  M4  Wallets (sovereign custody, our keys only, 1:1 trader binding)
  M5  Traders (AI actors, wallet-bound, all tool calls monitored)
  M6  Conductor (supervisory AI, veto, pause/investigate, SAE intake)
  M7  SAE monitor (trader surveillance, Brain-compatible message format)

Grounded in AMM invariant mechanics, MEV game theory, SDE tokenomics,
and evolutionary consensus games. Tax stub for Verschwörern Veregeister.

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.6 <noreply@anthropic.com>

core/docs/plans/M7-sae-monitor.md

@@ -0,0 +1,83 @@
+# M7 — SAE monitor (trader surveillance)
+
+## 1. Component
+The economy organ's internal watchdog: a **sparse autoencoder pointed at every trader tool call**.
+Monitors all Trader (M5) actions — Marketplace submissions, Sim queries, Data Feed reads, and
+any other tool invocation — and reports **suspicious behavior** to the Conductor (M6). Messages
+from the SAE share **identical format and signatures** with Brain messages, so the Conductor
+processes them through the same pathway.
+
+Extends the F2 (SAE monitor) pattern to the economy organ's internal domain. F2 watches
+subagents at the organism level; M7 watches traders at the stomach level.
+
+## 2. Status / certainty
+DESIGN-FIRST · ABSENT. F2 SAE monitor provides the architectural pattern (watch the machinery,
+never the homunculus — F2-L1). M7 adapts this: watch the **traders** (the machinery), never the
+**Conductor** (the stomach's judgment). Role C3; implementation C1.
+
+## 3. Language & location
+TBD · `src/economy/sae/`. ML interpretability (sparse autoencoder over trader action embeddings).
+Shares the architectural pattern with F2 but is a separate instance scoped to the economy organ.
+
+## 4. Does / does-not
+- **Does:** intercept and log **every trader tool call** (Marketplace, Sims, Feeds, internal);
+  embed trader action sequences; run SAE anomaly detection over action embeddings; flag suspicious
+  patterns (unusual trading frequency, outsized positions, coordinated behavior across traders,
+  repeated failed actions, unusual Sim query patterns); report alerts to the Conductor (M6) with
+  evidence; format alerts **identically to Brain messages** (same structure, same signatures).
+- **Does-not:** block actions directly (Conductor decides); watch the Conductor (the stomach's
+  "homunculus" — echoes F2-L1); correct trader behavior (detection only — F2-L2: no closed
+  elimination loop); trade or access wallets.
+
+## 5. Interface contract
+- `log_tool_call(trader_id, tool_name, args, result, timestamp)` — called on every trader tool
+  invocation. Synchronous interception (the call is logged before execution proceeds).
+- `alert(trader_id, alert_type, evidence, severity) -> SAEAlert`.
+  `alert_type` ∈ { `unusual_frequency`, `outsized_position`, `coordinated_behavior`,
+  `repeated_failures`, `anomalous_queries`, `pattern_deviation` }.
+  `severity` ∈ { `low`, `medium`, `high`, `critical` }.
+- `SAEAlert` structure is **identical to Brain message structure** — same fields, same
+  signature scheme. The Conductor (M6) processes SAE alerts and Brain messages through the
+  same intake (M6-L5).
+- `status() -> { active, traders_monitored, alerts_pending, model_freshness }`.
+
+## 6. Dependencies & stubs
+- M5 Traders — tool call source; *stub:* canned tool call log.
+- M6 Conductor — alert consumer; *stub:* print alerts.
+- F2 SAE monitor (organism-level) — architectural pattern; no runtime dependency.
+
+## 7. Invariants / laws
+- **L1 (C5):** the SAE watches **traders, never the Conductor** — the Conductor is the
+  stomach's judgment; the SAE monitors the machinery. Echoes F2-L1 (watch the machinery, never
+  the homunculus).
+- **L2 (C5):** **every tool call is logged** — no trader action escapes monitoring. This is
+  enforced architecturally (tool call interception), not by policy.
+- **L3 (C4):** **detection only, no enforcement** — the SAE reports to the Conductor; it never
+  blocks, pauses, or modifies trader actions itself. Echoes F2-L2 (no closed elimination loop).
+- **L4 (C4):** **alert format = Brain message format** — structurally identical, same signatures.
+  This is not coincidental; it ensures the Conductor can be supervised by the Brain using the
+  same protocol if the organism ever needs to override stomach autonomy.
+- **L5 (C3):** the SAE model is **trained on normal trader behavior** — anomalies are deviations
+  from the learned normal, not violations of predefined rules (those are the law script's job
+  in M1).
+
+## 8. Build steps
+1. Implement tool-call interception in the trader harness (M5).
+2. Define the action embedding scheme (how tool calls are vectorized).
+3. Train the SAE on normal trader behavior (bootstrapped from simulated trading).
+4. Implement anomaly scoring and alert threshold.
+5. Wire alerts to Conductor (M6) in Brain-compatible message format.
+
+## 9. Tests
+Interception: every tool call produces a log entry. Anomaly: known-suspicious patterns (e.g.
+100x normal frequency) trigger alert. Normal: baseline behavior does not trigger alert.
+No enforcement: SAE cannot pause or block a trader (only Conductor can). Alert format: SAE
+alert parses as valid Brain message. Conductor-blind: no Conductor action appears in SAE logs.
+
+## 10. Open items
+- SAE architecture (how many features? reconstruction vs. classification?).
+- Training data bootstrapping (simulated trading or historical data?).
+- Alert threshold tuning (too sensitive = alert fatigue; too lax = missed anomalies).
+- Whether M7 should also monitor Marketplace execution outcomes (fills, slippage) in addition
+  to tool calls.
+- Relationship to F2: shared model? shared training pipeline? or fully independent?