tools.html: say where the harness and tee relay actually come from

[wshallwshall]

Closes the one item deliberately deferred in #99 — and turns up a second, worse instance beside it.

The problem

tools.html lists six tools under "What's in the box", each with a command and no indication of
where it comes from. Two of them don't come from the engine wheel, and the page's framing implies
they do.

Tool	Card said	Reality
Test harness	python -m harness	Ships as its own distribution, messagefoundry-harness — the engine wheel is only-include = ["messagefoundry", …], so harness/ isn't in it
Tee relay	python -m tee	No published package provides it at all — source checkout only

Neither command is wrong; both work once you have the right thing installed. The defect is that the
page never told you what that was, while listing them alongside tools that do come with
pip install messagefoundry.

The tee relay is the sharper find

It wasn't in the audit and I hadn't flagged it. tee/ is a repo-root directory, not inside
messagefoundry/, not force-included by any distribution (only messagefoundry-harness does that,
for harness/), and has no entry point. There is no packaging/messagefoundry-tee. So unlike the
harness — which at least has a distribution — the tee relay is reachable only from a source checkout.

Verified against the engine, not assumed

• pyproject.toml:21 — only-include = ["messagefoundry", "README.md", "CHANGELOG.md", "LICENSE", "NOTICE"]
• packaging/ — contains exactly messagefoundry-harness and messagefoundry-webconsole
• packaging/messagefoundry-harness/pyproject.toml:54 — force-include = { "../../harness" = "harness" }
• [project.scripts] / [project.gui-scripts] — messagefoundry and messagefoundry-tray only; no tee

The doc sources already state the harness packaging correctly after #100/#101 (Install-Guide.md:270,
System-Requirements.md:130), so this brings the HTML into line with the published PDFs rather than
inventing a new claim. tools.html was the last place on the site that disagreed.

Scope

Two sentences, one file, no structural or CSS change — text appended inside two existing <p> elements.

Layout note: the Browser pane isn't compositing in this session (clientWidth reads 0), so I could
not measure rendered layout. The change adds no new elements and no long unbreakable token beyond a
21-character <code> span, so the risk is negligible — but I'd rather state the limit than imply a
visual check I didn't do.

🤖 Generated with Claude Code