docs: papers_research evidenced — 6 of 12, and its citations are real

First run of the papers_research team: a bounded library on microVM and
sandbox isolation for agents, delivered as a README index plus four
notes with complete frontmatter, judged met.

The judge could only confirm the frontmatter was present. A paper team
whose container has no pdf-to-text tool is exactly where invented
citations appear, so every arXiv id was checked against the arXiv API:
all four exist with exact title matches. One, 2603.02277
(SandboxEscapeBench), was already cited in the operator's own research
pass — independent evidence of on-topic work, not plausible filler.

It also confirmed ToolSearch by a real run, one of the allowlisted tools
the task-permission shadow had not yet seen.

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5.5 (1M context) <[email protected]>
Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_01WZb5A2kfVfjpdwSochkuHz

docs/TEMPLATE-MATURITY.md

@@ -63,11 +63,11 @@ holding (it was 55 of 85 dangling once).
 | `gpu` | arch_analyst kernel_author bench_engineer coder committer | coding_readwrite | 13 | no |
 | `threejs` | scene_designer coder shader_author perf_engineer committer | coding_readwrite | 13 | no |
 | `codebase_research` | code_archeologist architecture_mapper flow_tracer vault_scribe | research_readonly | 11 | **yes** — first run 2026-09-22 |
-| `papers_research` | domain_scout paper_reader library_curator | research_web_readonly | 8 | no |
+| `papers_research` | domain_scout paper_reader library_curator | research_web_readonly | 8 | **yes** — first run 2026-09-22 |
 | `insight_research` | implementation_tracker novelty_hunter publication_drafter | research_readonly | 8 | no |
 | `continuous_improvement` | brain_inspector improvement_proposer improvement_evaluator | research_readonly | 7 | no |
 
-**Five of twelve are evidenced.** `backend` was exercised on 2026-09-22,
+**Six of twelve are evidenced.** `backend` was exercised on 2026-09-22,
 the first time anything had been staffed from it: all five roles
 provisioned with real agents (api_designer, db_engineer, coder, tester,
 committer), and the mission delivered cursor pagination — `Paged<T>`,
@@ -87,7 +87,18 @@ citations verify exactly** (`hook_script_with` 562, `NODE_EXTRACT` 789,
 `TaskPolicy` 297, `ROLE_POLICIES` 261, `settings_hook` 809,
 `install_command_with` 819). Nothing hallucinated. **Five of twelve.**
 
-**Three of the remaining seven are still unevidenced.** The other nine are well-formed scaffolding:
+`papers_research` followed: asked for a bounded library on microVM and
+sandbox isolation for agents, it delivered a README index and four notes
+with complete frontmatter, judged met. The judge could only check the
+frontmatter was *present*; a paper team whose container has no
+pdf-to-text tool is exactly where invented citations live, so every
+arXiv id was checked against arXiv itself — **all four exist, with exact
+title matches**. One of them, `2603.02277` (SandboxEscapeBench), is a paper
+the operator's own research pass had already cited, which is independent
+evidence it found on-topic work rather than plausible filler. **Six of
+twelve.**
+
+**Two of the remaining six are still unevidenced.** The other nine are well-formed scaffolding:
 roles, prompts, brain seeds and resolving skills, and no run behind any of
 them. They will probably work — they are structurally identical to the three
 that do — but "probably" is the word, and this codebase has a name for the gap