docs: state the single-shot limitation honestly

The benchmark is single-shot (one prompt, one completion); it does not measure
a real multi-turn agent session, where the ruleset re-injects and the ladder
deliberates every turn. Adds that caveat to the README, and corrects the
benchmarks/README note that claimed caching widens the gap "in ponytail's
favor" (unverified, and a measured agentic A/B in #121 found the opposite can
happen). Per-session cost can land either way.

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.8 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>

README.md

@@ -52,7 +52,7 @@ Five everyday tasks (email validator, debounce, CSV sum, countdown timer, rate l
 
 **80-94% less code, 42-75% less cost, and 3-6× faster than a no-skill agent, on every Claude model.** Every shortcut ponytail takes is marked in the code with a `ponytail:` comment naming its upgrade path. Reproduce it yourself: `npx promptfoo eval -c benchmarks/promptfooconfig.yaml`. Method and raw numbers: [benchmarks/](benchmarks/). Production-grade tasks, where an unconstrained agent bloats far more, are written up in [benchmarks/results/](benchmarks/results/).
 
-**That is the byproduct, not the pitch.** These are Claude numbers, and they vary by model. Capable instruction-following models follow the ladder and write far less, cheaper and faster. Terse reasoning models can go the other way: the ladder is a deliberation step, so the model spends thinking tokens working through the rungs before it saves any output, and together with the always-on ruleset that can cost more than the shorter code saves. On GPT-5.5 it does. The rule was never "fewest tokens." It is: write only what the task needs, and never cut validation, error handling, security, or accessibility. The code ends up small because it is necessary, not golfed, and that is the part that stays maintainable. Lower cost and latency are a side effect on the models that follow it.
+**That is the byproduct, not the pitch.** These are Claude numbers, and they vary by model. Capable instruction-following models follow the ladder and write far less, cheaper and faster. Terse reasoning models can go the other way: the ladder is a deliberation step, so the model spends thinking tokens working through the rungs before it saves any output, and together with the always-on ruleset that can cost more than the shorter code saves. On GPT-5.5 it does. And all of this is single-shot, one prompt in and one answer out: a real agent session re-injects the ruleset and runs the ladder every turn, which this benchmark does not measure, so per-session cost can land either way. The rule was never "fewest tokens." It is: write only what the task needs, and never cut validation, error handling, security, or accessibility. The code ends up small because it is necessary, not golfed, and that is the part that stays maintainable. Lower cost and latency are a side effect on the models that follow it.
 
 ## How it works
 

benchmarks/README.md

@@ -79,5 +79,5 @@ Running the benchmark requires **Python 3**, **pandas**, and **Node.js** (18+).
 ## Notes
 
 - Caveman is a prose-compression skill (it leaves code "normal"), so it lands between baseline and ponytail on code size and wins mainly on prose tokens.
-- Cost reflects single-shot calls that re-send the skill every time. In real sessions the skill is injected once and prompt-cached, so the cost gap widens further in ponytail's favor.
+- Cost reflects single-shot calls (one prompt, one completion), not real multi-turn agent sessions. In a session the ruleset re-injects and the ladder deliberates every turn across many turns, so per-session cost can come out higher or lower than these numbers. Prompt caching offsets some of the re-injection, but a measured agentic A/B ([#121](https://github.com/DietrichGebert/ponytail/issues/121)) found ponytail can also raise tool calls and cost on completion-forced tasks. Treat these as generation numbers, not a session-cost promise.
 - These are everyday tasks. For production-grade specs, where an unconstrained agent bloats much harder, see the writeups in `results/`.