writ reconcile: the command is renamed, and its renderings go through the sink #774

Epic: #740 — one output convention, every app.
Plan: docs/plans/feature/774-writ-reconcile.md
Related: #762 (the writ lifecycle surface, whose phase 2 this is), #756, #761

writ status is retired and writ reconcile takes its place. This is not a rename followed by a
rendering refactor — it is one piece of work, because the renderings being rewritten live in the package
being renamed.

The settled surface

writ reconcile produces a report. It has no command flags. It takes the globals — --output /
-o, --filter, --jq, --store, --dry-run — and must utilize all of them faithfully. The selector
between fix, diff and summary behaviors is deferred to the reconciliation epic (#772).

What has to happen

The rename. git mv cmd/writ/writ/status cmd/writ/writ/reconcile, status.go → reconcile.go, so
history follows. status.Report → reconcile.Report and the rest of the package surface. No alias — the
old name stops existing. The scenario tests and the plan documents naming writ status follow.

The renderings. 30 stdout call sites route through the sink:

The globals, actually consumed. -o must render all eight formats rather than one. --store must be
read. --jq and --filter must reach the pipeline. --dry-run must be honored.

One design question this raises and does not answer

Report is an object of three slices and a struct — shape S4 — so -o list renders four lines with each
section as compact JSON, and -o table renders one row of four cells. Legible for list, useless for
table. Whether that is acceptable, or whether the presenters need a case for a sectioned object, is a
question for after the pipeline is wired. Wiring is not blocked on it: -o json, -o yaml, -o none,
--jq and --filter all become correct immediately.