feat(goldset): AI second-opinion per item (QA aid) — compare vs human tag

The chair wanted an independent recommendation beside each tag, to reconsider
his own judgments. Adds a NON-ground-truth AI second-opinion:

- schema: halacha_goldset.ai_is_holding / ai_correct_type / ai_rationale /
  ai_generated_at (additive).
- db.goldset_set_ai_recommendation + goldset_list now returns the ai_* fields.
- scripts/goldset_ai_recommend.py — local claude_session judges is_holding +
  type + a one-line rationale per item, INDEPENDENTLY (own legal rubric).
  Independent of the rule-based validators #81.8 measures → no circularity.
  Never auto-applied; QA aid only.
- web-ui: each card shows "🤖 המלצת AI: הלכה/לא · type" + rationale and an
  agreement/disagreement chip vs the human tag (amber on disagree); a
  "⚠ אי-הסכמות AI (N)" filter to review only the conflicts.

Methodology note kept explicit: the human stays the ground truth; the AI is a
prompt to reconsider, not to copy.

Verified: tsc --noEmit 0; generator stores recs and flags disagreements with
existing human tags.

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.8 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>

web-ui/src/lib/api/goldset.ts

@@ -29,6 +29,11 @@ export type GoldsetItem = {
   case_number: string | null;
   case_name: string | null;
   source_type: string | null;  // 'court_ruling' | 'appeals_committee' | ''
+  // AI second-opinion (QA aid — independent, not ground truth, not auto-applied)
+  ai_is_holding: boolean | null;
+  ai_correct_type: string;
+  ai_rationale: string;
+  ai_generated_at: string | null;
 };
 
 export type GoldsetScore = {