chore: trim verbose preamble + coverage audit prose

Compress without removing behavior or voice. Three targeted cuts:

1. scripts/resolvers/testing.ts coverage diagram example: 40 lines → 14
   lines. Two-column ASCII layout instead of stacked sections.
   Preserves all required regression-guard phrases (processPayment,
   refundPayment, billing.test.ts, checkout.e2e.ts, COVERAGE, QUALITY,
   GAPS, Code paths, User flows, ASCII coverage diagram).

2. scripts/resolvers/preamble/generate-completion-status.ts Plan Status
   Footer: was 35 lines with embedded markdown table example, now 7
   lines that describe the table inline. The footer fires only at
   ExitPlanMode time — Claude can construct the placeholder table from
   the inline description without copying a literal example.

3. Same file's Plan Mode Safe Operations + Skill Invocation During Plan
   Mode sections compressed from ~25 lines combined to ~12. Preserves
   all required test phrases (precedence over generic plan mode behavior,
   Do not continue the workflow, cancel the skill or leave plan mode,
   PLAN MODE EXCEPTION).

NOT touched:
- Voice directive (Garry's voice — protected per CLAUDE.md)
- Office-hours Phase 6 Handoff (Garry's voice + YC pitch)
- Test bootstrap, review army, plan completion (carefully tuned behavior)

Token savings (per skill, system-wide):
  ship/SKILL.md           35474 → 34992 tokens (-482)
  plan-ceo-review         29436 → 28940 (-496)
  office-hours            26700 → 26204 (-496)

Still over the 25K ceiling. Bigger reduction requires restructure
(move large resolvers to externally-referenced docs, split /ship into
ship-quick + ship-full, or refactor the coverage audit + review army
into shorter prose). That's a follow-up — added to TODOS.

Tests: 420/420 pass on gen-skill-docs.test.ts + host-config.test.ts.
Goldens regenerated for claude/codex/factory ship.

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.7 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>

scripts/resolvers/testing.ts

@@ -338,47 +338,25 @@ When uncertain whether a change is a regression, err on the side of writing the
 Include BOTH code paths and user flows in the same diagram. Mark E2E-worthy and eval-worthy paths:
 
 \`\`\`
-CODE PATH COVERAGE
-===========================
-[+] src/services/billing.ts
-    │
-    ├── processPayment()
-    │   ├── [★★★ TESTED] Happy path + card declined + timeout — billing.test.ts:42
-    │   ├── [GAP]         Network timeout — NO TEST
-    │   └── [GAP]         Invalid currency — NO TEST
-    │
-    └── refundPayment()
-        ├── [★★  TESTED] Full refund — billing.test.ts:89
-        └── [★   TESTED] Partial refund (checks non-throw only) — billing.test.ts:101
+CODE PATHS                                            USER FLOWS
+[+] src/services/billing.ts                           [+] Payment checkout
+  ├── processPayment()                                  ├── [★★★ TESTED] Complete purchase — checkout.e2e.ts:15
+  │   ├── [★★★ TESTED] happy + declined + timeout      ├── [GAP] [→E2E] Double-click submit
+  │   ├── [GAP]         Network timeout                 └── [GAP]        Navigate away mid-payment
+  │   └── [GAP]         Invalid currency
+  └── refundPayment()                                 [+] Error states
+      ├── [★★  TESTED] Full refund — :89                ├── [★★  TESTED] Card declined message
+      └── [★   TESTED] Partial (non-throw only) — :101  └── [GAP]        Network timeout UX
 
-USER FLOW COVERAGE
-===========================
-[+] Payment checkout flow
-    │
-    ├── [★★★ TESTED] Complete purchase — checkout.e2e.ts:15
-    ├── [GAP] [→E2E] Double-click submit — needs E2E, not just unit
-    ├── [GAP]         Navigate away during payment — unit test sufficient
-    └── [★   TESTED]  Form validation errors (checks render only) — checkout.test.ts:40
+LLM integration: [GAP] [→EVAL] Prompt template change — needs eval test
 
-[+] Error states
-    │
-    ├── [★★  TESTED] Card declined message — billing.test.ts:58
-    ├── [GAP]         Network timeout UX (what does user see?) — NO TEST
-    └── [GAP]         Empty cart submission — NO TEST
-
-[+] LLM integration
-    │
-    └── [GAP] [→EVAL] Prompt template change — needs eval test
-
-─────────────────────────────────
-COVERAGE: 5/13 paths tested (38%)
-  Code paths: 3/5 (60%)
-  User flows: 2/8 (25%)
-QUALITY:  ★★★: 2  ★★: 2  ★: 1
-GAPS: 8 paths need tests (2 need E2E, 1 needs eval)
-─────────────────────────────────
+COVERAGE: 5/13 paths tested (38%)  |  Code paths: 3/5 (60%)  |  User flows: 2/8 (25%)
+QUALITY: ★★★:2 ★★:2 ★:1  |  GAPS: 8 (2 E2E, 1 eval)
 \`\`\`
 
+Legend: ★★★ behavior + edge + error  |  ★★ happy path  |  ★ smoke check
+[→E2E] = needs integration test  |  [→EVAL] = needs LLM eval
+
 **Fast path:** All paths covered → "${mode === 'ship' ? 'Step 7' : mode === 'review' ? 'Step 4.75' : 'Test review'}: All new code paths have test coverage ✓" Continue.`);
 
   // ── Mode-specific action section ──