An unavailable prerequisite should not be mistaken for a failed product behavior
A blocked result should tell the team what prevents a verdict and which dependency must be resolved. Without that information, the status becomes a waiting label that accumulates indefinitely. The record can identify the missing approved source package, the affected criterion, and the role responsible for supplying it. It should not fabricate a product failure merely to fit a binary pass-or-fail field. The evaluation should restore the missing fixture and confirm that the same criterion can then run with a new result, while the earlier blocked observation remains understandable. Another case should use a present but invalid fixture to distinguish missing prerequisites from setup errors. These states may all affect delivery readiness, but they suggest different next actions. Preserving the distinction makes the project status more actionable than a single red indicator with no explanation.
Working through the example
A report validation needs an approved source package, but one required file has not been supplied. The check cannot establish whether the report is correct. Record the result as blocked with the missing prerequisite and responsible follow-up. Preserve the distinction from a check that ran and found an incorrect report.
A discriminating check
Remove a required fixture and confirm that the status explains why verification could not proceed. A prolonged blocker may affect delivery decisions, but it is still different from observed functional failure. The cited link-maintenance work informs the traceability problem. The project’s verification states are a design response that still requires evaluation against actual review and delivery workflows.