remit-newlisted

# New The brief preserves the practitioner's words and boundary. Structure them without widening them; mark interpretations before filing. Do not fill an unknown with plausible authority. If supplied wording would defeat the stated outcome or leave a material contradiction, explain that consequence and ask for the specific missing decision before filing it. Do not silently correct it or treat an unexplained contradiction as a settled ruling. Missing earlier answers do not establish the intended choice. Write `**Depends on:**` from mechanical facts: a required contract's item slug, or `none`. Do not ask for scheduling or invent work to enable a start. For "file it", "park it", an idea or backlog, use `--park`. If the supplied words already establish a judgeable outcome, ask nothing more. Otherwise ask once what would show it delivered, and take the answer as it stands. For a brief or refinement, read `.remit/rules/refined.md`. Ask only about unmet `fix` criteria, once each. Reuse answers and authority already supplied. When research is requested, establish what it should answer and return; record that in a `**Research:**` line without re-asking what the practitioner already specified. ## Proportionate preparation Establish the problem before selecting a solution. For consequential or uncertain work, use research to describe valuable outcomes without prematurely choosing technology, then research the technical approach and define how the outcome will be judged before build