diff --git a/plans/content-brief-synthesis.md b/plans/content-brief-synthesis.md
new file mode 100644
index 00000000..f2802491
--- /dev/null
+++ b/plans/content-brief-synthesis.md
@@ -0,0 +1,89 @@
+# Content Briefs: Winnability Gate and LLM Brief Synthesis
+
+## Context
+
+canonry already surfaces content opportunities deterministically. `@ainyc/canonry-intelligence` builds three row sets from a single `OrchestratorInput`:
+
+- `buildContentTargetRows` (`packages/intelligence/src/content-targets.ts:107`): per-query targets with `demandSource`, a `ContentAction`, action confidence, and the winning competitor.
+- `buildContentGapRows`: queries only competitors are cited for.
+- `buildContentSourceRows`: the cited-source breakdown.
+
+A narrow LLM layer already exists on top. `POST /projects/:name/content/recommendations/:targetRef/analyze` (`packages/api-routes/src/content.ts`) calls an injected `ExplainContentRecommendationFn`, implemented by `createRecommendationExplainer` (`packages/canonry/src/agent/recommendation-explainer.ts`). It uses pi-ai `complete()` at the `analyze` capability tier, is multi-provider, and caches by `(projectId, targetRef, promptVersion)` in `recommendation_explanations` (`packages/db/src/schema.ts:830`). Its system prompt explains, in 3 to 5 bullets and under 600 characters, why a single target matters.
+
+Two gaps separate that output from a content brief an operator can act on:
+
+1. **No winnability signal.** A target whose cited surface is owned by aggregators or editorial media (a head term the site cannot realistically win with its own content) is presented the same as a differentiated query the site can own. Operators make that call by hand today. The signal already exists but is siloed: discovery classifies every recurring cited domain as `direct-competitor | ota-aggregator | editorial-media | other | unknown` (prompt at `packages/canonry/src/discovery-run.ts:281`; OTAs and booking or review platforms are explicitly `ota-aggregator`, listicles and blogs `editorial-media`). content-targets only consumes `competitorDomains`, so it knows "a competitor is cited" but not "the surface is an aggregator we should not chase."
+2. **Explain, not brief.** The LLM layer explains why a target matters. It does not synthesize the brief: the angle, the why-winnable rationale, and the schema or markup hookup.
+
+Net: the judgment "defend the ownable queries, do not chase the ceded head terms" plus the brief itself happen manually, outside the tool.
+
+## Goal
+
+Two surgical extensions that keep determinism deciding **what** and the LLM deciding only **how to write**:
+
+1. A deterministic `surfaceClass` (ownable vs ceded) on every content target, reusing the discovery classifier. No new LLM calls.
+2. A `brief` mode on the existing content explainer that synthesizes a structured brief, reusing the same provider plumbing, capability tier, and prompt-version cache, gated to ownable targets.
+
+## Non-goals
+
+- No new provider or LLM plumbing. Reuse the `recommendation-explainer.ts` pattern.
+- The LLM never invents targets. It only renders briefs for targets the deterministic layer already surfaced and gated.
+- No content is published. The output is a brief; a human acts on it.
+
+## Plan
+
+### Step 1: Make the domain classification queryable per domain
+
+The classifier result is written into the discovery session `competitor_map` (`packages/api-routes/src/discovery/orchestrate.ts`), keyed to a session, not to a `(project, domain)` lookup. content-targets runs on every report and sweep and cannot run a discovery probe, so it needs a cheap per-domain lookup. Two options:
+
+- **1a (no migration):** read the latest `completed` discovery session for the project and index its `competitor_map` by domain. Simplest, but the gate only works once discovery has run, and it reflects the last session's view.
+- **1b (small migration, preferred):** add a `domain_classifications` table keyed by `(projectId, domain)` carrying the latest `competitorType` plus provenance (`sessionId`, `classifiedAt`). Upsert it when a discovery session completes in `orchestrate.ts`. Decoupled from session retention and cheap to join.
+
+Recommend 1b. Either way, treat missing or stale classifications as `unknown` (see the Step 2 fail-open rule).
+
+### Step 2: surfaceClass winnability gate on content targets (deterministic, the moat)
+
+- `packages/intelligence/src/content-targets.ts`: in `buildContentTargetRows`, look up the class of the domains actually cited for each query (from Step 1) and derive:
+  - cited surface dominated by `ota-aggregator` or `editorial-media` gives `surfaceClass: 'ceded'`.
+  - cited surface that is `direct-competitor`, the own domain, `other`, `unknown`, or has no citation gives `surfaceClass: 'ownable'` (fail open: when in doubt, it is worth a brief).
+  - "Dominated" means the combined aggregator and editorial share of the cited domains for that query crosses a documented threshold. Start conservative, for example a majority, and unit-test the boundary.
+- Add `surfaceClass: 'ownable' | 'ceded'` (and optionally a numeric `winnability`) to `ContentTargetRowDto` (`packages/contracts/src/content.ts`).
+- `GET /projects/:name/content/targets` gains an optional `surfaceClass` filter; default ordering surfaces `ownable` first.
+- This is a pure data join over existing inputs. No LLM, no new external calls.
+
+### Step 3: brief mode on the content explainer (LLM synthesis, reuse plumbing)
+
+- `packages/canonry/src/agent/recommendation-explainer.ts`: add a brief template and a structured-output path beside the existing explainer. Keep the same `complete()` call, `analyze` tier, provider and api-key resolution, and cache-key shape. Add a separate `RECOMMENDATION_BRIEF_PROMPT_VERSION` so the two modes cache independently.
+  - The brief prompt returns structure, not prose: `targetQuery`, `surfaceClass`, `angle`, `whyWinnable` (must cite the gap signal and surfaceClass verbatim from context), `schemaHookup` (the schema.org type or markup to add or extend), and the controllable-surface rationale.
+- `packages/api-routes/src/content.ts`: add `mode: 'explain' | 'brief'` to `recommendationExplainRequestSchema` and branch in the route, or add a sibling `POST .../:targetRef/brief`.
+  - Enforce the gate server-side: reject `brief` for a `ceded` target with a clear 4xx, so a brief is never generated for a head term we should not chase.
+  - Persist the structured brief plus provider, model, and cost, mirroring `recommendation_explanations`. Either add a `mode` discriminator to that table or add `recommendation_briefs`.
+
+### Step 4: CLI and MCP surface
+
+There is no `cnry content` command group today; targets are API, web, report, and MCP only. Add:
+
+- `cnry content targets <project> [--ownable] [--format json]`: deterministic targets with surfaceClass.
+- `cnry content brief <project> [--target <ref>] [--all-ownable] [--format json]`: generate or fetch briefs for ownable targets.
+- `cnry content map <project>`: convenience command that prints ranked ownable targets, each with its brief. The operator-facing one-shot.
+- Register an MCP tool (`packages/canonry/src/mcp/tool-registry.ts`) so agents can call it headless.
+- The report content section (`packages/api-routes/src/report.ts`) can graduate from the templated recommendation string to the brief when one exists.
+
+### Step 5: Tests and docs
+
+- Unit tests for the surfaceClass rule: ownable vs ceded across aggregator-dominated, editorial-dominated, competitor-cited, own-cited, and no-citation queries, plus the threshold boundary.
+- Contract test for the gated brief route: ceded returns 4xx, ownable returns a cached structured brief.
+- Explainer test: the brief prompt-version cache is isolated from explain mode.
+- Docs: a content section under `docs/` and the CLI reference, noting the determinism-decides-what, LLM-decides-how split.
+
+## Risks and open questions
+
+- **Classifier coverage.** The gate is only as good as the classifications available. A project that never ran discovery has none, so every target stays `ownable`. That is acceptable: the gate adds signal where it exists and never hides a target. Document that running discovery improves the gate.
+- **Freshness.** A persisted classification can lag a domain's real role. A provenance timestamp plus a refresh on each discovery completion bounds this; treat stale as `unknown` and fail open.
+- **Threshold tuning.** "Dominated" is a judgment knob. Start conservative, unit-test the boundary, document the default, and consider exposing it in config later.
+- **Brief grounding.** Brief quality depends on the context fields fed in. Reuse the explainer's verbatim-signal discipline: cite the gap, do not invent facts.
+- **Cost.** One `analyze`-tier call per ownable target on refresh. The existing prompt-version cache already bounds repeat cost, and the gate further reduces calls by excluding ceded targets.
+
+## Why this shape
+
+Determinism decides which queries are worth writing for, from real citation evidence and the existing classifier, so the LLM cannot drift into generic suggestions. The LLM only renders a brief for a target the deterministic layer already surfaced and gated. The work reuses two systems that already exist (the discovery classifier and the content explainer), so it is an extension rather than a new subsystem, which keeps the blast radius small.