State provenance of the prompt field (FunctionGemma chat template)

README.md

@@ -182,6 +182,15 @@ The rows are programmatic expansions of hand-written English stems — no model
 scraped corpus is involved, and no personal data is present. The paths and filenames in the slot
 pools are generic placeholders (`~/Downloads`, `invoice`, `screenshot`), not real user data.
 
+**Provenance of the `prompt` field.** The utterances, the tool labels and the argument values are
+original work and are MIT. The `prompt` field, however, is those utterances rendered through
+FunctionGemma's chat template — so it carries that model's control tokens and declaration syntax
+(`<start_function_declaration>`, `<escape>`, and so on). No Gemma model generated any text here;
+`data/generate.py` loads the tokenizer only to apply its template. We take the view that a prompt
+format is an interchange schema rather than model output, and licence the data MIT accordingly —
+but the provenance is stated plainly so you can form your own view. The `tool` and `args` fields in
+`meta.jsonl` are format-independent if you would rather re-render the prompts for another model.
+
 **One caveat about downstream use.** This data is MIT, but the *model* trained on it in this
 project is a FunctionGemma derivative and is governed by the
 [Gemma Terms of Use](https://ai.google.dev/gemma/terms) — the dataset licence does not and cannot