feat: add Discuss and Explore subagents for dynamic critique and code exploration

- Implement Discuss Subagent for multi-perspective critique with dynamic perspectives.
- Create Explore Subagent for shared codebase exploration with centralized caching.
- Add tests for CcwToolsMcpCard component to ensure enabled tools are preserved on config save.
- Introduce SessionPreviewPanel component for previewing and selecting sessions for Memory V2 extraction.
- Develop CommandCreateDialog component for creating/importing commands with import and CLI generate modes.

.claude/skills/team-coordinate/subagents/discuss-subagent.md

@@ -0,0 +1,133 @@
+# Discuss Subagent
+
+Lightweight multi-perspective critique engine. Called inline by any role needing peer review. Perspectives are dynamic -- specified by the calling role, not pre-defined.
+
+## Design
+
+Unlike team-lifecycle-v4's fixed perspective definitions (product, technical, quality, risk, coverage), team-coordinate uses **dynamic perspectives** passed in the prompt. The calling role decides what viewpoints matter for its artifact.
+
+## Invocation
+
+Called by roles after artifact creation:
+
+```
+Task({
+  subagent_type: "cli-discuss-agent",
+  run_in_background: false,
+  description: "Discuss <round-id>",
+  prompt: `## Multi-Perspective Critique: <round-id>
+
+### Input
+- Artifact: <artifact-path>
+- Round: <round-id>
+- Session: <session-folder>
+
+### Perspectives
+<Dynamic perspective list -- each entry defines: name, cli_tool, role_label, focus_areas>
+
+Example:
+| Perspective | CLI Tool | Role | Focus Areas |
+|-------------|----------|------|-------------|
+| Feasibility | gemini | Engineer | Implementation complexity, technical risks, resource needs |
+| Clarity | codex | Editor | Readability, logical flow, completeness of explanation |
+| Accuracy | gemini | Domain Expert | Factual correctness, source reliability, claim verification |
+
+### Execution Steps
+1. Read artifact from <artifact-path>
+2. For each perspective, launch CLI analysis in background:
+   Bash(command="ccw cli -p 'PURPOSE: Analyze from <role> perspective for <round-id>
+   TASK: <focus-areas>
+   MODE: analysis
+   CONTEXT: Artifact content below
+   EXPECTED: JSON with strengths[], weaknesses[], suggestions[], rating (1-5)
+   CONSTRAINTS: Output valid JSON only
+
+   Artifact:
+   <artifact-content>' --tool <cli-tool> --mode analysis", run_in_background=true)
+3. Wait for all CLI results
+4. Divergence detection:
+   - High severity: any rating <= 2, critical issue identified
+   - Medium severity: rating spread (max - min) >= 3, or single perspective rated <= 2 with others >= 3
+   - Low severity: minor suggestions only, all ratings >= 3
+5. Consensus determination:
+   - No high-severity divergences AND average rating >= 3.0 -> consensus_reached
+   - Otherwise -> consensus_blocked
+6. Synthesize:
+   - Convergent themes (agreed by 2+ perspectives)
+   - Divergent views (conflicting assessments)
+   - Action items from suggestions
+7. Write discussion record to: <session-folder>/discussions/<round-id>-discussion.md
+
+### Discussion Record Format
+# Discussion Record: <round-id>
+
+**Artifact**: <artifact-path>
+**Perspectives**: <list>
+**Consensus**: reached / blocked
+**Average Rating**: <avg>/5
+
+## Convergent Themes
+- <theme>
+
+## Divergent Views
+- **<topic>** (<severity>): <description>
+
+## Action Items
+1. <item>
+
+## Ratings
+| Perspective | Rating |
+|-------------|--------|
+| <name> | <n>/5 |
+
+### Return Value
+
+**When consensus_reached**:
+Return a summary string with:
+- Verdict: consensus_reached
+- Average rating
+- Key action items (top 3)
+- Discussion record path
+
+**When consensus_blocked**:
+Return a structured summary with:
+- Verdict: consensus_blocked
+- Severity: HIGH | MEDIUM | LOW
+- Average rating
+- Divergence summary: top 3 divergent points with perspective attribution
+- Action items: prioritized list of required changes
+- Recommendation: revise | proceed-with-caution | escalate
+- Discussion record path
+
+### Error Handling
+- Single CLI fails -> fallback to direct Claude analysis for that perspective
+- All CLI fail -> generate basic discussion from direct artifact reading
+- Artifact not found -> return error immediately`
+})
+```
+
+## Integration with Calling Role
+
+The calling role is responsible for:
+
+1. **Before calling**: Complete primary artifact output
+2. **Calling**: Invoke discuss subagent with appropriate dynamic perspectives
+3. **After calling**:
+
+| Verdict | Severity | Role Action |
+|---------|----------|-------------|
+| consensus_reached | - | Include action items in Phase 5 report, proceed normally |
+| consensus_blocked | HIGH | Include divergence details in Phase 5 SendMessage. Do NOT self-revise -- coordinator decides. |
+| consensus_blocked | MEDIUM | Include warning in Phase 5 SendMessage. Proceed normally. |
+| consensus_blocked | LOW | Treat as consensus_reached with notes. Proceed normally. |
+
+**SendMessage format for consensus_blocked (HIGH or MEDIUM)**:
+
+```
+[<role>] <task-id> complete. Discuss <round-id>: consensus_blocked (severity=<severity>)
+Divergences: <top-3-divergent-points>
+Action items: <prioritized-items>
+Recommendation: <revise|proceed-with-caution|escalate>
+Artifact: <artifact-path>
+Discussion: <discussion-record-path>
+```