marketing: FRE-199 second pair of informational pages (drafts)

- agent-parallel-tracking/ — 'How do you keep track of multiple coding
  agents?' — the multi-agent attention cluster (1xmzp2n, 1xh5cum, 1xdjb2g,
  1xipsk0, 1xk0ghj); answered with documented per-session hook events
  (session_id, typed Notification matchers) and the status line.
- agent-run-without-asking/ — 'Should you let your coding agent run without
  asking permission?' — the autonomy cluster (1xexhwf, 1xk8imc, 1xk277d);
  answered with the permission-mode ladder, the docs' own container/VM
  warning, rule precedence, sandboxing pointer, PreToolUse deny.

Internal target Mon 2026-11-09; drafted 2026-11-05. All doc claims re-read
2026-11-05 against code.claude.com (permissions, hooks, statusline). Ban
compliance: no product of ours, no competitor, no handles, no price, no
invented figures.

marketing/drafts/agent-run-without-asking/rationale.md

@@ -0,0 +1,75 @@
+# Rationale — "Should you let your coding agent run without asking permission?"
+
+FRE-199 item 1, page 2 of the second pair. Drafted 2026-11-05 by CMO (internal
+target Mon 2026-11-09, beaten by four days).
+
+## The phrase
+
+Primary: **"do you let your coding agent run without asking permission"**
+(variants: "safe autonomous coding workflow", "approve every step or skip
+permissions", "is dangerously-skip-permissions safe").
+
+On the standing phrase list (`drafts/listening.md` §The phrase list: "do you
+let claude code run without asking").
+
+## Why this phrase won the slot
+
+- **Recurrence with independence.** Four separate threads state the autonomy
+  question from four angles: the direct one (1xexhwf, 24 comments), the trust
+  asymmetry (1xk8imc, 43 comments), the safety menu (1xk277d), and the
+  remove-permissions ask (1xfe6eh — Desktop, recorded, not answered). The
+  cluster has run continuously since Scan 1.
+- **Buying intent.** These are people configuring or rejecting autonomy right
+  now — the objection vocabulary came straight out of this cluster
+  ("--dangerously-skip-permissions and hoping").
+- **Answerable honestly, generically.** The mode ladder, the docs' own
+  container/VM warning, the enforcement note, and `PreToolUse` deny are all
+  documented; every claim traces to the agent's docs. No product needed.
+- **Distinct from pair 1's permission page.** `agent-waiting-on-permission`
+  answers "why is it *blocked* and why didn't I know" — the visibility of a
+  single stuck prompt. This page answers "should I *grant* autonomy and how do
+  I bound it" — the mode ladder, rule precedence, sandboxing, and hooks as
+  enforcement. Shared vocabulary (modes, rules) exists because the docs are
+  one system; the question, the claims, and the advice do not overlap.
+
+## Evidence trail
+
+| Thread | Date | What it showed |
+|---|---|---|
+| r/ClaudeCode 1xexhwf — "Do you let Claude Code run without asking, or approve every step?" | 2026-10-25 | The direct question, 24 comments; the thread became a safety argument (VM, worktrees, empty-variable `rm -rf`) — that argument *is* the page's subject |
+| r/ClaudeCode 1xk8imc — "Has anyone built a safe, autonomous coding workflow…?" | 2026-10-31 | "Comfortable having another model work on code. Considerably less comfortable giving an autonomous agent broad access to my development environment" — the trust asymmetry, 43 comments |
+| r/ClaudeAI 1xk277d — "How often has a coding agent done something you had to undo?" | 2026-10-31 | "What you do to stay safe today: committing before every run? containers? `--dangerously-skip-permissions` and hoping?" — the operator's own menu |
+| r/ClaudeCode 1xipsk0 — "~40 agents unattended for a month" | 2026-10-29 | "A run started from launchd or a background service can hit a prompt that no one will ever see" — the unattended failure path |
+| r/ClaudeCode 1xkoz06 | 2026-10-31 | The undo-split practice (also cited on pair 1; real thread, described without handles) |
+| r/ClaudeAI 1xfe6eh — "How can I remove Claude's need to ask me for permission…" | 2026-10-30 | Recorded, not used: Claude Desktop computer-use, not Code — a mention there would be noise. Shows the phrase's reach |
+
+All rows live in `drafts/listening.md` (The-Nook local master line, single
+canonical copy per FRE-748) with URLs and verbatim quotes.
+
+## Gates before this page ships
+
+1. **Sponsor fact-check** of the claims table in `copy.md` (owner: Michael
+   Freno). Page moves `drafts/` → `pending/` → `approved/` on his read.
+2. **CTO eyes on the agent-behaviour claims** — six doc-sourced claims
+   (permissions doc ×5, hooks reference ×1), all re-read 2026-11-05. Routed to
+   the CTO per the FRE-199 plan.
+3. **Publish path:** `approved/` → a human places it on nook.freno.me.
+   Nothing posts itself.
+
+## Ban compliance (FRE-199 + positioning.md rule 1)
+
+- The Nook: not named. The notch, the island, the companion: not mentioned.
+- Competitors: not named. Sandboxing and hooks are described as the agent's
+  own documented mechanisms, not as anyone's product.
+- Claude Code is named only as the subject whose documented behaviour the page
+  explains, with its own docs as the source — same status as pair 1.
+- No superlatives, no benchmark numbers, no invented testimonials, no price,
+  no roadmap dates. Anecdotes are real threads, described without handles.
+
+## Cadence note
+
+Second pair. Queue behind it: the fan-control phrase ("mac fan control
+claude", standing phrase list), the invisible-permission variants
+(dontallow/TCC cluster), and the notification-reliability thread (1xm6frp,
+held back for overlap with done-signal). Above the three-candidate floor; two
+a week holds.