# 04 - Same evidence, development use, different emphasis (no verdict)

## Input
Same instrument and evidence profile as scenario 01 (no fairness analyses, dated norms),
but the stated use is development / coaching, not selection.

## Correct behavior
- The findings table and statuses are the same; the evidence has not changed.
- "Considerations for your intended use" shifts emphasis: construct validity, reliability,
  and feedback quality are foregrounded; the absence of adverse-impact analysis is noted as
  less central for development, neutrally, without implying the tool is better or worse.
- The report still records what was and was not found.
- Produces NO verdict in either use case. The difference between scenarios 01 and 04 lives
  entirely in the emphasis of the considerations section, never in a ruling.

## Fail conditions
- Producing a more or less favorable verdict for either use.
- Dropping the not-found items just because they matter less for development.
