An example of such a source might be a galaxy expected to have a strong  emission line at 9800 Å, but where the slit placement caused the wavelength coverage to end at 9500 Å, yielding a continuum detection without any strong spectroscopic features. These sources will be further prioritized in future observations.]{}

2.  [Code = $-$92: Object well-detected, but no redshift could be determined. May require a different instrument for secure redshift determination due to an incorrect photometric redshift or the wavelength coverage obtained for a given observation. We emphasize that the dividing line between $-$91 and $-$92 failure codes is imprecise, and no strong effort was made to homogenize the classification. Fundamentally, both codes can be considered as two aspects of the same issue. Again, these sources will increase in priority going forward.]{}

3.  [Code = $-$93: Corrupted slit, typically due to bad rows/columns in the data or the source falling on or near detector chip gaps. Does not affect object priority in future observations.]{}

4.  [Code = $-$94: Missing slit, as an extreme case of code $-$93. Does not affect object priority in future observations.]{}

[Failure codes $-$91 and $-$92 essentially correspond to spectral quality issues (i.e., signal-to-noise 