Survey: Galaxy reporting and publishing patterns

## Goal

Run an IWC corpus survey for how workflows decide what to publish, bundle, label, and expose as user-facing outputs.

## Why

Generated workflows need to produce useful Galaxy histories, not just valid graphs. IWC likely has repeated conventions around final reports, optional outputs, output bundles, and test-visible intermediates.

## Initial Evidence Targets

Search and inspect:

- `multiqc` and other report-producing steps
- workflow-level `outputs`
- output labels and naming conventions
- `__BUILD_LIST__`, `__MERGE_COLLECTION__`, report bundles
- optional reporting/export branches
- intermediate outputs promoted for user visibility or tests

## Questions

- When does IWC expose individual outputs vs collections?
- When are related outputs bundled?
- How are optional reports and exports gated or omitted?
- Which output-label conventions matter for tests and reviewer expectations?
- Are there recurring report-publication recipes that deserve pattern pages?

## Expected Output

- `content/research/iwc-reporting-and-publishing-survey.md`
- Candidate pattern boundaries for publishing/reporting/output-label recipes
- Cross-links to testability and conditionals surveys where relevant