Initially, it was believed that it would be necessary to enforce the number of inputs and outputs for transactions to maintain system integrity. However, upon further examination, this requirement seems to be less rigid than previously thought. Specifically, the critical control point appears to be the enforcement of the number of outputs from the previous transaction in scenarios involving complete withdrawals rather than the current transaction's input and output count.

This discovery suggests a simplification in the transaction management process. For instance, the distinction between 'cancel' transactions and others can be streamlined. Traditionally, 'cancel' was treated as a unique covenant case, necessitating separate handling procedures. The analysis indicates that such transactions can be integrated under the same covenant as 'trigger' cases. Essentially, any 'trigger' transaction that does not result in exactly two outputs naturally falls into the 'cancel' category, eliminating the need for explicit separation and processing of these cases.

However, while the focus on inputs and outputs may be relaxed, the necessity for strict enforcement around input indexes remains unchanged. This aspect is crucial for maintaining the coherence and reliability of the transaction process, underscoring the importance of indexation in the system's operational integrity.

It's important to note that these insights are part of an ongoing exploration and, as such, should not be considered final. Further adjustments and clarifications are anticipated as the model undergoes additional refinement. Detailed findings and methodologies will be shared in a forthcoming publication, allowing for a comprehensive review and discussion within the community.