fix(F18-F19): get evidence onto page one earlier, measured not asserted

F18 - page-one weighting
- Across four compiled packages the first employment entry began at 45-55% of
  page one. A reader reaching the middle of the page had seen a profile and a
  skills block, and no evidence.
- The old skills rule counted `\skillline` MACROS, which does not control
  density: six categories with long value lists wrap to twelve or more rendered
  lines. Replaced with a rendered-line budget verified in the compiled PDF, plus
  the rule that a skills line repeating what three bullets below already prove is
  spending the first screen to say it twice.
- Employer chronology stays reverse-chronological; the ordering freedom is
  WITHIN a position, where the bullet closest to the target role leads.
- New helper `page_metrics.py` measures page-one geometry from the PDF via
  pdftotext -bbox.

F19 - education and phrasing
- Degree + focus + institution crammed into one cell with a right-aligned date
  produced visible word spacing and mid-word breaks in SBB, NVIDIA and Aker BP.
  Split the entry, as RUAG_AI_Engineer_C5I already did. Template carries the rule.
- Grades and thesis stay only where concretely relevant. claims.json
  grade_output_rule already keeps grades off by default; the M.Eng. thesis earns
  its place on condition-monitoring or sensor-data roles and otherwise does not.

Validated by measurement rather than assertion
- page_metrics.py first reproduced the review's own figures (NVIDIA 55.4%,
  SBB 50.6%, RUAG 50.3%). That is what makes the after-figure meaningful.
- The NVIDIA CV was rebuilt FROM A COPY with the guidance applied: experience
  moved 55.4% -> 44.0% of page one, page-one text lines 47 -> 39, still two
  pages, zero overfull boxes, validator PASS.
- The submitted package itself was not modified. F17 classifies archives as
  evidence, not as drafts.

The percentage is a diagnostic, not a target: no pixel goal and no rule that
page two must be filled.

All 19 review findings are now complete. 37/37 tests pass.

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

resume_builder/reference/resume_reference.md

@@ -159,3 +159,61 @@ Classify every JD requirement as:
 - **Gap:** no reliable evidence.
 
 Never turn Adjacent into Direct by vocabulary substitution. A required, title-defining Gap is an application-fit problem, not a resume-writing problem.
+
+---
+
+## Page-one weighting and rendered density (review findings F18/F19, 2026-09-11)
+
+**The problem, measured:** across four compiled packages the first real employment entry began
+at **45-55% of page one** (NVIDIA 55.4%, SBB 50.6%, RUAG 50.3%, Aker BP 45.4%). A reader
+reaching the middle of the page has seen a profile and a skills block, and no evidence yet.
+Measure with `helpers/page_metrics.py <pdf>` rather than estimating.
+
+These are **diagnostics, not targets.** There is no pixel goal and no rule that page two must
+be filled. A package that reads well at 50% is fine; a skills block that pushed evidence there
+is not.
+
+### Skills: budget RENDERED lines, not source macros
+
+The old rule counted `\skillline` macros, which does not control density: six categories with
+long value lists wrap to **twelve or more rendered lines**. The NVIDIA package is the worked
+example - six `\skillline` calls, one of them 240 characters.
+
+- **Aim for roughly 4-8 rendered lines of skills**, verified in the compiled PDF.
+- **Cut anything the experience bullets already prove.** A skills line repeating "Kubernetes,
+  Docker, GitLab CI/CD" when three bullets below say the same thing spends page-one space to
+  say it twice.
+- **Keep what the JD actually gates on** plus the ATS literals that are genuinely evidenced.
+  Drop adjacent nice-to-haves; they read as padding and cost the reader's first screen.
+- Certifications belong on one line, at the end, not spread across categories.
+
+**Worked example, measured 2026-09-11.** The submitted NVIDIA CV was rebuilt from a copy with
+this guidance applied - six skill lines cut to four by removing what the experience bullets
+already prove, and the education entries split per F19. Result: the experience section moved
+from **55.4% to 44.0%** of page one, page-one text lines from 47 to 39, still two pages, zero
+overfull boxes, validator PASS. The submitted document itself was NOT modified (F17: archives
+are evidence).
+
+### Order: employer chronology stays, evidence order inside a position does not
+
+- **Keep reverse-chronological employers.** Swiss and German readers expect it and breaking it
+  looks evasive.
+- **Within a position, lead with the bullet closest to the target role**, not with the one that
+  happens to be most senior or most recent. The chronology is between employers, not inside one.
+- After the short profile, the next thing should be **either the experience section or a very
+  compact competence block**. Not both at full length.
+
+### Education (F19)
+
+Long single-cell entries - degree, focus, institution, right-aligned date - produce visible
+word-spacing and mid-word breaks. Seen in SBB, NVIDIA and Aker BP.
+
+- **Split the entry**: degree on the entry line, institution (and focus) on the line below.
+  `RUAG_AI_Engineer_C5I` is the model that already does this well.
+- **Grades and thesis stay only where they carry concrete relevance.** For an experienced
+  industry profile they usually do not; `claims.json` `grade_output_rule` already says grades
+  are off by default. The M.Eng. thesis is worth naming when the role touches condition
+  monitoring, diagnostics or industrial sensor data - as the SBB asset-management req did -
+  and otherwise not.
+- Do not let an immutable template line force education detail into a document that does not
+  need it.