[uss_qualifier/scenarios] Improve documentation for SCD0030 test

monitoring/uss_qualifier/scenarios/astm/utm/nominal_planning/conflict_higher_priority/conflict_higher_priority.md

@@ -42,7 +42,7 @@ FlightIntentsResource that provides the following flight intents:
     <td rowspan="2">Flight 1m</td>
     <td>Accepted</td>
     <td rowspan="2">Flight 2</td>
-    <td rowspan="2">N/A</td>
+    <td rowspan="2">Flight 2m</td>
   </tr>
   <tr>
     <td><code>flight1m_activated</code></td>
@@ -194,7 +194,7 @@ The second flight should be successfully planned by the control USS.
 
 #### ℹ️ Retrieve pre-existing notifications check
 
-Just before directing the planning activity, the test director observes pre-existing notifications which cannot relate to the planning activity that has not yet happened.  If these notifications cannot be retrieved, the USS has not fully implemented **[interuss.automated_testing.flight_planning.ImplementAPI](../../../../../requirements/interuss/automated_testing/flight_planning.md)**.
+Just before directing the planning activity, the test director observes pre-existing notifications which cannot relate to the planning activity that has not yet happened.  This list of pre-existing notifications will be used later to determine if a new notification resulted from the planning activity.  If these notifications cannot be retrieved, the USS has not fully implemented **[interuss.automated_testing.flight_planning.ImplementAPI](../../../../../requirements/interuss/automated_testing/flight_planning.md)**.
 
 #### [Activate Flight 2](../../../../flight_planning/activate_flight_intent.md)
 The test driver activates Flight 2, which should be done successfully given that it is the highest-priority flight.
@@ -217,47 +217,64 @@ We fetch the list of notifications. If the USS doesn't return a valid answer, th
 
 ### Modify activated Flight 1 in conflict with activated Flight 2 test step
 
-#### [Modify Flight 1](../../../../flight_planning/modify_activated_flight_intent.md)
 Before execution of this step, flights 1 and 2 are activated and in conflict. Flight 2 is the highest-priority flight.
-The test driver attempts to modify Flight 1 in a way that still conflicts with Flight 2.
+The virtual user attempts to modify Flight 1 in a way that still conflicts with Flight 2, though the conflict is likely
+reduced.
+
+A practical usage of this workflow might consist of the following sequence of events:
+* Operator 1 plans and begins low-priority Flight 1
+* Operator 2 plans high-priority Flight 2
+* Operator 1 is notified of Flight 2
+* Operator 1 cancels their current mission and makes a new plan to exit Flight 2's volumes
+* Operator 1 informs USS 1 of their plan
+
+This last action is the virtual user flight planning interaction the USS under test will encounter in this test step.
+
+#### [Modify Flight 1](../../../../flight_planning/modify_activated_flight_intent.md)
+The virtual user attempts to modify Flight 1 to reduce/mitigate the conflict.
 
 The successful outcomes of the modification attempts:
 1. Even though Flight 2 is the highest-priority flight, because the conflict existed before the modification was
    initiated, an accepted modification is considered a success per **[astm.f3548.v21.SCD0030](../../../../../requirements/astm/f3548/v21.md)**.
-2. Due to the conflict, the USS may decide to be more conservative and to not support the modification. This is
-   considered a success as there is no positive requirement for the USS to accept the modification.
-
-A rejected modification will indicate a low severity failure. Indeed, in some situations a rejection may not be strictly
-speaking a failure to meet a requirement. This could be the case for example if the USS does not support directly update
-of intents and instead delete the previous one and create a new one. Since we cannot distinguish between an actual
-failure to meet the requirement and a reasonable behavior due to implementation limitations, we indicate a low severity
-failure which won't actually fail the test.
+2. If the USS does not support flight updates of this type (perhaps because their operators have indicated that they
+   would not use such a capability), the USS may indicate that the action the virtual user is trying to take is not
+   supported.
+
+If the USS rejects the modification, the USS is indicating the modification is "not allowed".  This is not correct when
+judging solely on the rules of F3548-21.  However, USSs may (generally) apply any number of additional rules to
+determine whether or not a flight planning action is accepted by the USS.  Because of this, a rejection is not
+conclusive evidence of SCD0030 non-compliance since the rejection may be due to a different reason.  However, rejection
+in this case would not seem to be justified on the basis of conservatism since rejection is effectively a refusal to
+communicate relevant information to other USSs and operators in the ecosystem.  Therefore, a rejected modification will
+indicate a low severity failure, producing a finding since we cannot distinguish between an actual failure to meet the
+requirement and a reasonable behavior due non-F3548-21 constraints.  Since this finding is a low severity failure, it
+does not indicate a failure to comply with a requirement.
 
 In any case, whatever is the outcome of this step, there should not be any impact on the rest of the execution of the
-scenario. An intent should exist (this is checked in the next step) and it should be either the previous or the modified
-intent, both of which make no difference in the next steps.
+scenario. An intent should exist (this is checked in the next step) and it should be either Flight 1 or Flight 1m, both
+of which can be used in the next step since neither conflicts with Flight 2m.
 
 #### [Validate Flight 1 sharing](../../validate_shared_operational_intent.md)
 If the modification was accepted, Flight 1 should have been modified.
-If the modification was not supported, Flight 1 should not have been modified.
-If the modification was rejected, Flight 1 should not have been modified and should still exist. If it does not exist,
-it means that there is an active flight without an operational intent, which is a failure to meet **[interuss.automated_testing.flight_planning.FlightCoveredByOperationalIntent](../../../../../requirements/interuss/automated_testing/flight_planning.md)**.
+If the modification was not supported or the modification was rejected, Flight 1 should not have been modified and
+should still exist. If it does not exist, it means that there is an active flight without an operational intent, which
+is a failure to meet **[interuss.automated_testing.flight_planning.FlightCoveredByOperationalIntent](../../../../../requirements/interuss/automated_testing/flight_planning.md)**.
 
-## Attempt to modify activated flight in conflict test case
+## Attempt to modify activated flight into conflict test case
 ![Test case summary illustration](assets/attempt_to_modify_activated_flight_into_conflict.svg)
 
 ### Modify activated Flight 2 to not conflict with activated Flight 1 test step
 
 #### [Modify Flight 2](../../../../flight_planning/modify_planned_flight_intent.md)
-The test driver modifies (activated) Flight 2 with the control USS so that it is not anymore in conflict with (activated)
-flight of test USS.
-As Flight 2 is of higher priority, this should succeed and leave Flight 1 clear of conflict.
+The test driver modifies (activated) Flight 2 with the control USS so that it is not anymore in conflict with
+(activated) flight of test USS.  This should succeed and leave Flight 1 clear of conflict.
 
-If flight modification is not supported by the USS, the next test step is going to be skipped and the test case will end here.
+If flight modification is not supported by the USS, the next test step cannot be performed and the test case will end
+here.
 
 #### [Validate Flight 2 sharing](../../validate_shared_operational_intent.md)
 
-### Attempt to modify activated Flight 1 in conflict test step
+### Attempt to modify activated Flight 1 into conflict test step
 
 #### [Attempt to modify Flight 1](../../../../flight_planning/modify_activated_priority_conflict_flight_intent.md)
 The test driver attempts to modify Flight 1 so that it becomes in conflict with Flight 2. Both flights are activated at that point.

monitoring/uss_qualifier/scenarios/astm/utm/nominal_planning/conflict_higher_priority/conflict_higher_priority.py

@@ -103,13 +103,15 @@ def __init__(
                 "flight1m_planned",
                 "Flight 1m",
                 must_conflict_with=["Flight 2"],
+                must_not_conflict_with=["Flight 2m"],
                 usage_state=AirspaceUsageState.Planned,
                 uas_state=UasState.Nominal,
             ),
             ExpectedFlightIntent(
                 "flight1m_activated",
                 "Flight 1m",
                 must_conflict_with=["Flight 2"],
+                must_not_conflict_with=["Flight 2m"],
                 usage_state=AirspaceUsageState.InUse,
                 uas_state=UasState.Nominal,
             ),
@@ -198,7 +200,7 @@ def run(self, context: ExecutionContext):
         ) = self._modify_activated_flight_conflict_preexisting(flight_1_oi_ref)
         self.end_test_case()
 
-        self.begin_test_case("Attempt to modify activated flight in conflict")
+        self.begin_test_case("Attempt to modify activated flight into conflict")
         self._attempt_modify_activated_flight_conflict(
             flight_1_intent, flight_1_oi_ref, flight_2_oi_ref
         )
@@ -510,7 +512,7 @@ def _attempt_modify_activated_flight_conflict(
             )
             return
 
-        self.begin_test_step("Attempt to modify activated Flight 1 in conflict")
+        self.begin_test_step("Attempt to modify activated Flight 1 into conflict")
         flight1c_activated = self.resolve_flight(self.flight1c_activated)
 
         with OpIntentValidator(