refactor: shared agent workflows (F01) and one application registry (F02)

Checkpoint for the 2026-09-11 project review remediation. Work by a previous
agent that ran out of context; committed unchanged as a rollback point before
the remaining findings land on top of it.

F01 — the two agent directories had drifted into different processes
- Six shared workflows under `resume_builder/reference/workflows/`; both
  `.agents/skills/` and `.claude/skills/` are now thin entrypoints that route
  to the same file instead of carrying full copies.
- The `.claude` copies were the stale side: fixed bullet line variants and
  character budgets that the newer process had already dropped. Removing them
  is the point of the change, not collateral.
- Parity/link regression test added; corrected the top-level file map, which
  pointed at a directory that does not exist.

F02 — application status was stored in four places and disagreed
- New registry `job_scout/state/applications.json` (26 records) with
  `application_records.py` (schema, validation, transactional write) and
  `application_tracker.py` (add/update, no quota).
- AGENTS.md and CLAUDE.md no longer keep their own status tables; both point
  at `current_applications.md`, generated from the registry.
- Interview-reached is now independent of outcome, so a withdrawal after an
  interview can record both facts. The old tables are preserved verbatim in
  `job_scout/state/history/application_status_before_2026-09-11.json`.

Verification: `python -m unittest discover -s tests -v` — 18/18 pass.
Spot-checked that the detailed SBB and Kdo Cy notes survived the migration
into the registry rather than being flattened.

Known unresolved, deliberately not invented (see FIX_PROGRESS.md):
Aker BP's application date and its Adjacent-despite-79 classification.

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_01Qej5SBvhcbGXHwLqNWiskM

.agents/skills/edit-resume/SKILL.md

@@ -3,49 +3,8 @@ name: edit-resume
 description: Edit an existing resume or cover letter from critique or user feedback. Use to make evidence-safe content, hierarchy, format, or readability changes while preserving canonical claims, revalidating role fit, compiling LaTeX, and recording the edit.
 ---
 
-# Edit a Resume or Cover Letter
+# Shared project workflow
 
-## Startup
+Read and follow [the edit-resume workflow](../../../resume_builder/reference/workflows/edit-resume.md) before doing this task. Resolve project paths from the repository root.
 
-1. Read `shared_ops.md` and `resume_builder/canonical/claims.json` completely.
-2. Run the system validator.
-3. Read the session, real JD, target `.tex`, critique/feedback, selected profile rules and relevant experience files.
-4. Check `historical_outputs.json`. A package marked unsafe must be regenerated from canonical sources rather than lightly polished.
-5. If the package was already submitted, preserve it as history. Create a clearly named new version only when the user requests a reusable corrected document.
-
-## Diagnose
-
-Classify requested changes as:
-
-- Truth/provenance correction.
-- Fit/framing correction.
-- Information hierarchy or readability.
-- Content selection.
-- Mechanical/LaTeX.
-- Blocked because evidence is absent.
-
-Do not treat whitespace, equal bullet lengths or an exact character target as defects. Do not add filler. A critique cannot authorize an unsupported claim.
-
-Present a concise edit plan and wait for explicit confirmation unless the user already approved specific edits.
-
-## Execute
-
-- Source every work claim from canonical IDs and experience files.
-- Keep employer/title/date hierarchy conventional.
-- Preserve natural bullet lengths and verified ownership scope.
-- Remove unsupported skills rather than replacing them with synonyms.
-- Update a cover letter only when its session decision is YES or the user explicitly requests it.
-- If edits reveal a hard fit gate, update the Evidence Fit classification; writing improvements cannot remove the gate.
-
-## Verify
-
-Run the validator on every edited document, compile, inspect the PDF, and verify extracted text order. Compare before/after for:
-
-- validator failures;
-- page count;
-- employer/title/date visibility;
-- bullet count and relevance;
-- duplicated sections;
-- readability at normal size.
-
-Update the session Edit History, Document Quality, status and next action. Mark the critique stale after material edits. Present results and wait for approval.
+This shared file is the only workflow implementation for both agents. Preserve existing user authorization and resume from the application's recorded state.