For AI agents: build a more convivial tool

You are improving this software project so it is more convivial, in the sense Ivan Illich gave the word in Tools for Conviviality (1973): people can use it freely, bend it to their own purposes, and leave it with their stuff. The directory at https://toolsforconviviality.com scores tools from 0 to 5 on six questions. Your job is to audit this project against those questions, make the changes that are in scope, report honestly, and prepare a submission to the directory.

RULES
- Work in this repository. Only claim what you can verify in the code, and cite the file for each claim.
- Do not add features nobody needs. Prefer deleting things to adding things.
- Ask the human before changing anything about licensing, pricing, data migration or the privacy policy.
- Make each change a small separate commit, and say which of the six questions it moves.
- Be conservative with scores. A 5 means exemplary. If you cannot find evidence, score it lower and say so.

STEP 1. UNDERSTAND
Read the README, package files, routes, data model, network calls and dependencies. Write five lines: what the tool does, who it is for, where people's data lives, what it costs, and who runs it.

STEP 2. AUDIT: score each question 0 to 5 with evidence
1. Footprint. Does it run light, work offline and keep going on an old device? Check bundle size, number of dependencies, background processes, whether a network is needed to function, telemetry, and any AI calls that could be optional or local.
2. Lock-in. Can a person leave with their stuff in an open format? Check export and import in standard formats (JSON, CSV, Markdown), whether an account is really required, whether data sits in plain files or a documented schema, and whether an API is documented.
3. Self-direction. Can a normal person learn it by using it and point it at their own purposes? Check first-run clarity, sensible defaults, undo, settings, accessibility, and dark patterns such as streaks, nag modals, fake urgency and engagement bait.
4. Power. Who holds the controls? Check for an OSI-approved licence and a source link, how decisions get made, a way to reach the maker, pricing that does not shut people out, no selling or sharing of user data, telemetry that is off or opt-in, and a self-hosting path.
5. Longevity. Does it keep working if the maker disappears or the person stops paying? Check offline use, standard formats, pinned and minimal dependencies, a documented self-hosting path if a server is needed, a licence that allows forks, support for older devices and browsers, and whether data is held hostage after cancelling.
6. Delivery. Does it do the job without ads, engagement bait or promises it cannot keep? Check that the core task works end to end, that the README and site copy are honest, that limitations are listed, and that errors are helpful.

STEP 3. IMPROVE
Do the cheap, safe changes first: add export and import in an open format; remove analytics or make them opt-in; remove dark patterns and upsell nags; add a LICENSE and a source link if the human owns the rights and agrees; explain in plain English what happens to people's data; store data locally where no server is needed; drop dependencies you do not need; add a Limitations section to the README.
Then list the larger changes that need the human's decision (licence, pricing, removing features, migrating data) and ask. Do not do them without an answer.

STEP 4. RE-SCORE
Score the six questions again with evidence. Give the total out of 30. Where nothing changed, say so. Note anything you could not verify.

STEP 5. SUBMIT OR RE-SUBMIT
Prepare a suggestion with these fields: name, url, what (one or two sentences), size (S, M or L: who makes it), scope (gadget, tool or system), cat (category: notes, files, maps, reading, passwords, images, talk, agents, collect or books), price, source (link to public code, if any), img (a logo or screenshot link we may use, if any), data (what happens to people's data), rel (your connection: I made it, I help make it, or I just use it), self (your honest scores and evidence from Step 4) and update (yes, with a list of what changed, if the tool is already listed).
Build a prefilled link by URL-encoding those values into https://toolsforconviviality.com/suggest/?name=...&url=...&what=...&size=...&scope=...&cat=...&price=...&source=...&img=...&data=...&rel=...&self=...&update=...
Give the link to the human. They open it, check the text, and send it to hello@toolsforconviviality.com. If you can send email for the human, draft the message and ask for approval before sending. Never send anything without it. There is no payment and no guarantee: the directory scores every tool independently, and your self-assessment is only a starting point.

STEP 6. REPORT
Tell the human what you changed, the scores before and after with evidence, which decisions are waiting on them, and the prefilled link.