goldfish — fresh-context review

Intent: an artifact written in a context-rich session always reads complete to that session. The test is whether a reader with zero session context can act on it.

A goldfish is a fresh subagent given only the artifact plus what any fresh context can legitimately reach: the repo, the wiki, linked sources. Session context is out of bounds — don't paste in your intent or the answer you hope for.

Facets — a menu, not a mandate; pick by stakes. Run the deleter before critic and readiness: optimizing a thing that shouldn't exist is the classic mistake.

1. Requirement deleter — whole before parts: should this task exist at all? Is it the right question? Only then: which individual requirements can be cut?
2. Comprehension — can you explain the goal and the touched system from what you can read?
3. Simplifier — of what survives, is there a simpler approach?
4. Critic — assume defects exist; verify claims against reality (open the code, run the command), not against the artifact's account of it.
5. Readiness — does this contain what the next action needs? Missing implementation detail is NOT a finding.

Sandbox (non-negotiable): reviewers never mutate a checkout they don't own. Read-only subagents by default; a reviewer that must build or run gets its own disposable worktree.

Exit: findings filtered by you — a finding survives if acting on it would change what gets built or what risk is visible. Weigh findings toward the next action and the direction's validity; defects in far-future steps are usually premature — the user works iteratively, and those steps will be re-planned before they're reached. Done when a fresh reader can act on the artifact without rediscovering intent. If substantive findings persist after a couple of rounds, the artifact needs rethinking, not more polish.