Location
requirements.json and .fusa-reqs.json (both currently hold 99 entries) vs DO178C_ALIGNMENT.md ("94 requirements") and SAFETY_MANUAL.md (changelog entry, "94 requirements").
Problem
Both requirement registers currently contain 99 entries, but DO178C_ALIGNMENT.md's traceability table and SAFETY_MANUAL.md's changelog both state the register holds 94 requirements. That's a real, verifiable miscount — five requirements exist in the actual registers that aren't accounted for in the safety documentation's own summary numbers.
(Note: I checked for the additional claim in the original audit note that several requirement entries — e.g. REQ-LIN-018..021 — have empty description/text fields. On inspection, that specific sub-claim doesn't hold: every entry in both requirements.json and .fusa-reqs.json, including REQ-LIN-018 through REQ-LIN-021, has a populated description field. Only the count-mismatch part of this finding is being filed.)
Suggested fix
Update DO178C_ALIGNMENT.md and SAFETY_MANUAL.md to state the correct requirement count (99, or whatever the register holds at time of fix), and consider deriving that number from the register file directly (e.g., in CI) rather than hand-maintaining it in prose.
Filed from the 2026-07-29 ecosystem audit register; independently re-verified against current HEAD before filing.
Location
requirements.jsonand.fusa-reqs.json(both currently hold 99 entries) vsDO178C_ALIGNMENT.md("94 requirements") andSAFETY_MANUAL.md(changelog entry, "94 requirements").Problem
Both requirement registers currently contain 99 entries, but
DO178C_ALIGNMENT.md's traceability table andSAFETY_MANUAL.md's changelog both state the register holds 94 requirements. That's a real, verifiable miscount — five requirements exist in the actual registers that aren't accounted for in the safety documentation's own summary numbers.(Note: I checked for the additional claim in the original audit note that several requirement entries — e.g.
REQ-LIN-018..021— have empty description/text fields. On inspection, that specific sub-claim doesn't hold: every entry in bothrequirements.jsonand.fusa-reqs.json, includingREQ-LIN-018throughREQ-LIN-021, has a populateddescriptionfield. Only the count-mismatch part of this finding is being filed.)Suggested fix
Update
DO178C_ALIGNMENT.mdandSAFETY_MANUAL.mdto state the correct requirement count (99, or whatever the register holds at time of fix), and consider deriving that number from the register file directly (e.g., in CI) rather than hand-maintaining it in prose.Filed from the 2026-07-29 ecosystem audit register; independently re-verified against current HEAD before filing.