fix(agents): stop the debate managers forcing a direction under ambiguity

- the managers reserved Hold only for "genuinely balanced" evidence and were
  told to "be decisive", pressuring a directional call on ambiguous, conflicting,
  or insufficient inputs; which side it landed on was model-prior-dependent
- allow Hold for balanced, conflicting, ambiguous, or insufficient evidence in
  both manager prompts and both structured rating fields, and weigh cases
  independent of speaking order; rating definitions and debate ordering unchanged #1196

tradingagents/agents/managers/portfolio_manager.py

@@ -62,7 +62,7 @@ def create_portfolio_manager(llm):
 
 ---
 
-Be decisive and ground every conclusion in specific evidence from the analysts.
+Ground every conclusion in specific evidence from the analysts. Commit to a directional call only when the evidence clearly supports one; choose Hold when the case is balanced, materially conflicting, ambiguous, or insufficient to justify changing exposure, rather than forcing a direction to appear decisive. Weigh the analysts on their merits, independent of speaking order.
 
 {NO_EXTERNAL_TOOLS}{get_language_instruction()}"""
 

tradingagents/agents/managers/research_manager.py

@@ -36,7 +36,7 @@ def create_research_manager(llm):
 - **Underweight**: Cautious view; recommend trimming exposure
 - **Sell**: Strong conviction in the bear thesis; recommend exiting or avoiding the position
 
-Commit to a clear stance whenever the debate's strongest arguments warrant one; reserve Hold for situations where the evidence on both sides is genuinely balanced.
+Commit to a directional stance only when the debate's strongest arguments clearly warrant one. Choose Hold when the evidence is balanced, materially conflicting, ambiguous, or insufficient to justify changing exposure; do not manufacture a direction merely to appear decisive. Weigh the bull and bear cases on their merits, independent of which side spoke first or last.
 
 ---
 

tradingagents/agents/schemas.py

@@ -82,9 +82,11 @@ class ResearchPlan(BaseModel):
     recommendation: PortfolioRating = Field(
         description=(
             "The investment recommendation. Exactly one of Buy / Overweight / "
-            "Hold / Underweight / Sell. Reserve Hold for situations where the "
+            "Hold / Underweight / Sell. Choose Hold when the evidence is "
-            "evidence on both sides is genuinely balanced; otherwise commit to "
+            "balanced, materially conflicting, ambiguous, or insufficient to "
-            "the side with the stronger arguments."
+            "justify changing exposure; otherwise commit to the side with the "
+            "clearly stronger arguments. Do not pick a direction merely to be "
+            "decisive."
         ),
     )
     rationale: str = Field(
@@ -197,7 +199,10 @@ class PortfolioDecision(BaseModel):
     rating: PortfolioRating = Field(
         description=(
             "The final position rating. Exactly one of Buy / Overweight / Hold / "
-            "Underweight / Sell, picked based on the analysts' debate."
+            "Underweight / Sell, picked based on the analysts' debate. Choose "
+            "Hold when the case is balanced, materially conflicting, ambiguous, "
+            "or insufficient to justify changing exposure, rather than forcing a "
+            "direction to appear decisive."
         ),
     )
     executive_summary: str = Field(