amiel-35 wants Mike workflows to travel as portable packs

amiel-35 has opened a proposal that doesn't touch how Mike actually runs - instead, it tries to pin down what a Mike "workflow" looks like on paper. The submission is just a specification and two worked examples: one for an assistant-style back-and-forth, one for a tabular document-review pass. The bet is that agreeing on the shape first makes everything downstream easier - reviewing a workflow, versioning it, translating it, swapping it between forks, or letting an outside contributor propose a new one.

The interesting bits are the design questions left on the table: what every workflow must declare, what's optional, how prompts attach to individual steps, and whether one definition can really cover both a chat-style flow and a row-by-row review without bending. Whatever gets agreed here will quietly set the rails for any runtime that later loads and validates these packs.