Our UR5e cover insert fits backwards and keeps the recipe green

Cover rests on a relief edge. Looks seated from above, but not on the intended pads.

Include that wrong seat in the review. A label check cannot repair the geometry.

Ask tooling to address orientation and family fit, with controls checking actual installed identity against the recipe. Keep removal and unreadable identity in the sequence review.

Can you try the proposed instructions with somebody who hasn't been watching this discussion? A person may read the correct storage label, fit the wrong insert and answer the confirmation honestly. That is a useful paper example before buying a reader. I wouldn't make it a memory test with two almost identical names. The review needs to show what they can actually identify after fitting, what the system checks and where they stop if the two disagree.

Setter tried it. Correct label read, fitted insert still uncertain. They stopped at the confirmation.

Good. The instruction needs changing, not the setter's confidence.

Does removing an insert clear the previous valid match?

Not in this draft. Controls is adding removal and restart cases to the review.

Who maintains the mapping when an insert revision changes? Stores needs an approved assembly reference, not an old family name that happens to look familiar.

Tooling coordinator with controls. One-way mounting proposed, but family identification still undecided.

Keep those two decisions separate in the next update, Grace. A one-way mounting may answer reversal while leaving a perfectly well-oriented wrong family. The setter's uncertainty is still a useful case for the combined design to answer.

Separated in the review sheet. No hardware selected, no verified recipe match yet.