feat(paper-review): add pre-submission novelty + reviewer skill

[ajbarea]

What

techne:paper-review — a pre-submission novelty + reviewer pass for a draft paper. Input a scaffolded paper dir (+ optional --from <repo>); output papers/<name>/novelty-review.md with four grounded sections:

1. Novelty per contribution — verdict + closest retrieved prior work (cited + verbatim snippet).
2. Related-work gaps — retrieved papers absent from references.bib.
3. Claim-support — first / N× / outperforms claims → supported / unsupported / overclaim.
4. Lab-overlap — adjacency to a lab/co-author line + a COPE disclosure checklist; it surfaces, does not adjudicate the boundary.

Sibling of techne:paper (which scaffolds the draft this one reviews).

Grounding

Follows OpenNovelty (arXiv 2601.01576): every verdict traces to a record retrieved this run, paired with a verbatim snippet and logged in a provenance appendix — or it is marked unverified. Retrieval substrate (live-tested): OpenAlex primary (keyless), web-search backstop, Semantic Scholar only with a key (keyless S2 returns HTTP 429). Only derived keyword queries leave the machine — never the (private, often double-blind) paper text.

Verification (TDD-for-skills)

• RED — a baseline review without the skill did decent freelance novelty work but missed the lab-overlap entirely, asserted citations with no snippets/provenance, and eyeballed the bibliography.
• GREEN — dogfooded on velocity-fl-systems: produced a grounded report that flagged Blades (the uncited near-direct competitor to the Byzantine arena), the weak ~135×-vs-pure-Python baseline, and surfaced the PID-MADE lab overlap with a disclosure checklist and no verdict.
• make validate + make build green.

Also

Registration repairs pre-existing drift: paper was missing from the docs nav, and paper + research-grounded from the README architecture tree (now all 12 skills are listed).