added additional context information

Author: LucaFgr

TSF/trustable/assertions/TA-BEHAVIOURS_CONTEXT.md

@@ -83,7 +83,7 @@ and that the resulting system and tests are validated by appropriate strategies.
 - Is every Expectation covered by at least one implemented test?
   - **Answer**: Yes, both of the expectations are covered by at least one implemented test.
 - Are there any Expectations where we believe more coverage would help?
-  - **Answer**: No.
+  - **Answer**: No, the coverage is already on a high level and no further gains are expected by further increasing the coverage.
 - How do dependencies affect Expectations, and are their properties verifiable?
   - **Answer**: The library nlohmann/json does not have external dependencies, so that there are in particular none that affect Expectations.
 - Are input analysis findings from components, tools, and data considered in relation to Expectations?

TSF/trustable/assertions/TA-CONSTRAINTS_CONTEXT.md

@@ -51,17 +51,17 @@ reporting bugs, issues, and requests.
 **Suggested evidence**
 
 - Installation manuals with worked examples
-  - **Answer**: 
+  - **Answer**: https://github.com/nlohmann/json?tab=readme-ov-file#integration
 - Configuration manuals with worked examples
-  - **Answer**: 
+  - **Answer**: https://github.com/nlohmann/json?tab=readme-ov-file#integration and https://github.com/nlohmann/json?tab=readme-ov-file#supported-compilers
 - Specification documentation with a clearly defined scope
-  - **Answer**: 
+  - **Answer**: https://github.com/nlohmann/json?tab=readme-ov-file#design-goals
 - User guides detailing limitations in interfaces designed for expandability or
   modularity
   - **Answer**: 
 - Documented strategies used by external users to address constraints and
   work with existing Statements
-  - **Answer**: 
+  - **Answer**: # All current AOUs here?
 
 **Confidence scoring**
 

TSF/trustable/assertions/TA-INDICATORS_CONTEXT.md

@@ -80,13 +80,13 @@ monitoring mechanisms have been implemented to collect the required data.
 **Checklist**
 
 - How appropriate/thorough are the analyses that led to the indicators?
-  - **Answer**: 
+  - **Answer**: Since no misbehaviours for the use of the library for parsing and verification of JSON data according to RFC8259 have been identified, no warning indicators are implemented.
 - How confident can we be that the list of indicators is comprehensive?
-  - **Answer**: 
+  - **Answer**:  There are no warning indicators implemented, of which we are very confident.
 - Could there be whole categories of warning indicators still missing?
-  - **Answer**: 
+  - **Answer**:  Yes, there could. Within S-CORE, however, any warning indicator that is not natively implemented within the original nlohmann/json should be implemented in the wrapper defining the interface between the library and the project using it.
 - How has the list of advance warning indicators varied over time?
-  - **Answer**: 
+  - **Answer**: It has stayed constant since there currently are no warning indicators.
 - How confident are we that the indicators are leading/predictive?
   - **Answer**: 
 - Are there misbehaviours that have no advance warning indicators?