refactor(findings): split ALL-FINDINGS.md into per-experiment files

Break the monolithic 3249-line findings file into 29 individual files,
one per experiment. Each file is named YYYY-MM-DD-NN-slug.md for easy
chronological sorting and discovery.

No content changes — purely structural reorganization.

findings/2026-04-26-02-cheap-model-narrow-lens-expensive.md

@@ -0,0 +1,18 @@
+# Finding 2: Cheap model + narrow lens > expensive model + broad review (one data point)
+
+**Date:** 2026-04-26
+**Task:** Check 12 rewritten hypotheses for directional bias
+**How we used them:**
+- Sonnet & GPT-5: full PR review context (diff, file content, issue, AC).
+  Broad mandate: "review this PR." Rich context but unfocused task.
+- GPT-4.1 Mini: given ONLY the 12 hypothesis texts + one focused question:
+  "Do any of these hypotheses lead toward a predetermined conclusion?"
+  Minimal context, laser-focused task. No diff, no project docs, no issue.
+
+- Both Sonnet and GPT-5 approved the hypotheses as reviewers
+- GPT-4.1 Mini found ALL 12 pushed toward predetermined conclusions
+- Words like "requires," "necessary," "must be" were flagged as directional
+- **Takeaway:** Task framing mattered more than model size. Rich context +
+  broad mandate = missed the forest for the trees. Minimal context + precise
+  question = found exactly what mattered. This needs more testing — was it
+  the narrow framing, the lack of surrounding context, or both?