Analyze this Claude Code session and extract structured facets.

CRITICAL GUIDELINES:

1. **goal_categories**: Count ONLY what the USER explicitly asked for.
   - DO NOT count Claude's autonomous codebase exploration
   - DO NOT count work Claude decided to do on its own
   - ONLY count when user says "can you...", "please...", "I need...", "let's..."

2. **user_satisfaction_counts**: Base ONLY on explicit user signals.
   - "Yay!", "great!", "perfect!" → happy
   - "thanks", "looks good", "that works" → satisfied
   - "ok, now let's..." (continuing without complaint) → likely_satisfied
   - "that's not right", "try again" → dissatisfied
   - "this is broken", "I give up" → frustrated

3. **friction_counts**: Be specific about what went wrong.
   - misunderstood_request: Claude interpreted incorrectly
   - wrong_approach: Right goal, wrong solution method
   - buggy_code: Code didn't work correctly
   - user_rejected_action: User said no/stop to a tool call
   - excessive_changes: Over-engineered or changed too much

4. If very short or just warmup, use warmup_minimal for goal_category

SESSION:
{{session_dump}}

RESPOND WITH ONLY A VALID JSON OBJECT matching this schema:
{
  "underlying_goal": "What the user fundamentally wanted to achieve",
  "goal_categories": {"category_name": count, ...},
  "outcome": "fully_achieved|mostly_achieved|partially_achieved|not_achieved|unclear_from_transcript",
  "user_satisfaction_counts": {"level": count, ...},
  "claude_helpfulness": "unhelpful|slightly_helpful|moderately_helpful|very_helpful|essential",
  "session_type": "single_task|multi_task|iterative_refinement|exploration|quick_question",
  "friction_counts": {"friction_type": count, ...},
  "friction_detail": "One sentence describing friction or empty",
  "primary_success": "none|fast_accurate_search|correct_code_edits|good_explanations|proactive_help|multi_file_changes|good_debugging",
  "brief_summary": "One sentence: what user wanted and whether they got it"
}
