Implement Markdown doctrine graph lifecycle

[kmosoti]

Summary

• Updates repo identity/scope from a docs-only doctrine repo to a Markdown-native doctrine graph with bounded Python lifecycle tooling.
• Adds graph standards, maps, ADRs, root doctrine pages, KB notes/concepts/antipatterns/examples, graph schema, and generated artifacts.
• Adds the tea_kb Python package and tea-kb CLI for validation, build/export, reports, visualization, inspection, neighbors, path, and tea-themed aliases.
• Adds uv/ruff/pyright/pytest project setup plus CI gates.

Graph output

• Nodes: 48
• Edges: 87
• Chunks: 183
• Concepts: 16
• Validation diagnostics: 0 errors, 0 warnings

Validation

• uv run ruff check
• uv run ruff format --check
• uv run pyright
• uv run pytest
• uv run tea-kb validate
• uv run tea-kb build --check

[chatgpt-codex-connector]

💡 Codex Review

Here are some automated review suggestions for this pull request.

Reviewed commit: 5f9f9c1c11

ℹ️ About Codex in GitHub

Your team has set up Codex to review pull requests in this repo. Reviews are triggered when you

• Open a pull request for review
• Mark a draft as ready
• Comment "@codex review".

If Codex has suggestions, it will comment; otherwise it will react with 👍.

Codex can also answer questions or update the PR. Try commenting "@codex address that feedback".

[chatgpt-codex-connector]

Check concept notes for every concept-bearing node

Because this validation only considers notes, examples, and antipatterns, concepts used exclusively by standards, doctrines, maps, or decisions are omitted from tea-kb validate even though those node types declare concepts frontmatter and the generated duplicate-concepts report already lists many missing concept notes such as concept:graph and concept:generated-artifacts. This makes validation and the health report report zero warnings while another generated artifact flags unresolved vocabulary, so missing controlled-vocabulary entries can be committed as a clean graph.

Useful? React with 👍 / 👎.