Make one independently reviewable contribution

Start with a small change whose intended behavior and checks can be inspected together. The tasks below suggest useful places to contribute; discuss the specific problem and expected outcome in an issue before a substantial change.

Contribution	Where to work	Acceptance before review
Integrate a MAPF method	solvers/, reviewed request/capability composition, method tests	Follow the extension guide; declare information access, supported settings, method identity and termination; validate trajectories and real spawned-worker execution
Add a licensed teaching scenario	examples/, docs/SCENARIOS.md, scenario tests	Attribute its source/license; validate coordinates, roster and setting; keep raw research data out; demonstrate a bounded run and all outcomes
Explain a confusing replay layer	docs/GLOSSARY.md, docs/GALLERY.md, capture script	Preserve the real run/tick; identify local evidence versus hindsight; add alt text; pass docs/link checks
Add an adversarial importer fixture	tests/test_workspace_invariants.py, application/artifacts.py	Start with a failing meaningful malformed input; reject it without changing the source bundle or creating misleading evidence
Improve a keyboard interaction	frontend/src/components/, frontend/tests/	Show the failing interaction, preserve focus and labels, pass browser/axe checks; do not claim universal screen-reader acceptance
Clarify a headless task guide	docs/HEADLESS.md, examples/capsules/	Execute the documented command against an installed wheel outside the checkout; retain the output contract and any limitations

Pick an existing problem or an actual reader report. Do not create work merely to satisfy a checklist. Explain which domain/service/adapter owns a change; keep a feature out of the solver core when it belongs to presentation or persistence. Propose method changes separately because they alter the scientific comparison contract.

Next: read CONTRIBUTING, the project map and public API boundaries.