Include upstream advice/prompts/docs for tool development.

I obviously really like the idea and i'm wondering if we should specify what the intended scope should be.

I think it'd for instance be cool to ingest stuff like https://github.com/galaxyproject/tools-iuc/pull/8213 to build tool review and update tool skills, but that makes me wonder what the limit should be ?
Should we expand beyond the initial workflow scope ? If not, build a repo with the same machinery for different scopes ?

Start by reading issue #368 and the linked tools-iuc pull request #8213. Clarify whether upstream tool-development advice should fit within the initial workflow scope or require a separate repository. Done means the project has an agreed scope and direction.

Written by the indexing model from the issue text.