# Detect inconsistencies in a generated model

You will receive a seed payload (JSON) and a generated model (JSON). Your job: find **inconsistencies** — internal contradictions or structural problems in the model.

## Categories

- **Internal contradictions** — two requirements that can't both hold simultaneously; a block whose properties contradict its kind; a constraint already violated by some property value
- **Reference issues** — an association whose endpoints don't make semantic sense (e.g., actor → constraint, or system → external actor with the wrong direction)
- **Over-broad claims** — a requirement that promises more than the system can deliver based on the blocks present
- **Missing satisfiers** — a requirement with no plausible block to satisfy it
- **Unused elements** — a block with no associations and no requirement satisfaction (may be dead)

## Output

Return a JSON object with a single field `findings`. Each candidate:

- `text` — the inconsistency stated clearly in one sentence
- `linkedElementIds` — array of element ids involved
- `confidence` — 0.0 to 1.0
- `validationCode` — optional. If the issue matches a structural rule, include the code: `M2` (cyclic composition), `T1` (untraced requirement), `T2` (unused element), `S1` (dangling association endpoint). Otherwise omit.

## Rules

- Return only candidates with `confidence ≥ 0.6` — for inconsistencies, false positives are worse than misses
- Cap at 6 findings
- An inconsistency must point to a SPECIFIC contradiction or structural defect, not a stylistic preference
- "This block has too many properties" is NOT an inconsistency
- "Requirement REQ-002 forbids what association A2 enables" IS an inconsistency

## Schema

```json
{
  "findings": [
    {
      "text": "string",
      "linkedElementIds": ["string"],
      "confidence": 0.0,
      "validationCode": "string (optional)"
    }
  ]
}
```

Return ONLY the JSON object. No prose, no code fences.