Stop telling the reader that the hundred directly imaged exoplanets were never imaged

Every exoplanet card without a map ended "Not an observation — no image of this world exists.",
and 395b613 wrote that rule into a comment ("Only an exoplanet has never been imaged") and a test.
The NASA Exoplanet Archive flags 102 planets as detected by imaging (ima_flag), all 102 of them in
exoplanets.json: HR 8799 b to e (Marois et al. 2008), bet Pic b, 51 Eri b, AF Lep b, and bet Pic c
and eps Ind A b, found by radial velocity and imaged since. The review read the sentence on the
live pages of HR 8799 b, 51 Eri b and bet Pic b.

The ETL now asks the archive for those names in a query of its own, cached apart from the main
table so the other 6 252 planets stay on the snapshot they were built from, and carries
`imaged: true` on the matching records. exoplanets.json changes by that field on 102 records and
nothing else (compared record by record). Their cards now end "Not an observation — it has been
imaged only as a point of light beside its star, and no map of it exists."; the rest keep "no
image of this world exists". The provenance comment and the texture catalogue's comment say which
is which.

Checked live on :4301: HR 8799 b and eps Ind A b carry the new sentence, Kepler-22 b the old one.

Tests: body-view-model.spec 'says a directly imaged exoplanet was seen as a point of light, not
that no image of it exists'; the old test is renamed 'says an exoplanet the archive does not flag
as imaged has no image'. Unit controls, each failing that test only (1 failed, 840 passed): the
provenance ignoring the flag; the view model dropping it. build.ts now requires at least 95
imaged planets (measured 102); control, the full ETL with the join made on the host's name
instead of the planet's, fails with "Only 0 exoplanets are marked as imaged".

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5.5 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>

tools/etl/build.ts

@@ -421,8 +421,17 @@ function validateExoplanets(exoplanets: ExoplanetRecord[], starIds: Set<number>)
   const withPeriod = exoplanets.filter((exoplanet) => exoplanet.periodDays !== undefined).length;
   const withHostMass = exoplanets.filter((exoplanet) => exoplanet.hostStarMassSolar !== undefined).length;
   console.log(`  ${withPeriod}/${exoplanets.length} have a measured period, ${withHostMass} a host star mass.`);
+
+  // The planets photographed by direct imaging, whose card must not say no image of them exists.
+  // Measured: 102 of 102 flagged in the archive are in the catalogue. What this catches is the
+  // join by name failing, which would put every one of them back under "no image".
+  const imaged = exoplanets.filter((exoplanet) => exoplanet.imaged).length;
+  assertCondition(imaged >= MIN_IMAGED_EXOPLANETS, `Only ${imaged} exoplanets are marked as imaged (at least ${MIN_IMAGED_EXOPLANETS} expected).`);
+  console.log(`  ${imaged} were imaged directly.`);
 }
 
+const MIN_IMAGED_EXOPLANETS = 95;
+
 const UNIT_VECTOR_TOLERANCE = 1e-6;
 
 function validateDeepSky(objects: DeepSkyRecord[]): void {