docs(rfc): define and enforce a uniform RFC format; adopt it across the corpus

Define the in-file RFC contract in docs/rfc/README.md § The file format:
the header block (`# RFC: <title>` plus a dateless Status enum
cross-checked against the lifecycle folder), the per-lifecycle body
skeleton (a Problem opener everywhere; Proposal/Alternatives considered/
Acceptance criteria/Risks in proposed/; present-tense Decision/
Consequences with proposal-era headings banned in implemented/; the
frozen proposal shape in rejected/), and a mandatory Alternatives
considered section with a date-fenced grandfather comment for pre-format
RFCs whose alternatives are not reconstructible from the record.

Enforce it with a new doc-sync gate, scripts/verify-rfc-format.ts, and
normalize all 112 RFCs to it: ~15 Status-line spellings collapse to the
enum, 29 Context openers become Problem, the 39 legacy-format XXX debt
markers are resolved and banned from reappearing, proposal-era sections
in implemented RFCs are rewritten to shipped reality (including the
web/fs/subagent seam RFCs' migration plans and test checklists, closing
the doc-tiers deferred-work item on the web seam), every RFC gains an
Alternatives considered section or the grandfather comment, and the
bilingual pair is re-mirrored and re-recorded.

Move the generated index tables out of README.md into a fully generated
docs/rfc/INDEX.md — gen-rfc-index now writes the whole file, and
verify-rfc-classification checks its freshness and rejects index-shaped
rows in the curated README — which makes room for the format contract to
live in the README front door instead of a separate FORMAT.md.

The decision record, and the first RFC written in the new format, is
docs/rfc/implemented/process/2026-07-05-uniform-rfc-format.md.

docs/rfc/proposed/architecture/2026-06-20-generic-long-running-tool-runtime.md

@@ -34,6 +34,8 @@ A consumer census of the surface the runtime would carve up. Production has two
 - ACP and snapshot fixtures render background bash through the shared task vocabulary, not through bash-only lifecycle semantics.
 - The [tool cookbook](../../../cookbook/adding-a-tool.md) points long-running tools at the shared runtime instead of telling each tool to invent its own task protocol.
 
-## What we give up
+## Risks
 
 The bash package loses local ownership of an already-working background-task implementation, and the implementing PR may temporarily churn model-facing tool names or transcript presentation. That churn is worthwhile if it leaves one background-task contract instead of making every future long-running tool clone bash's private protocol.
+
+<!-- rfc-format: alternatives-not-recorded (pre-format RFC) -->