I'm sorry I don't understand what you are both saying, about nearing to the "nearest even integer" (it's probably because of my lack of mathematical knowledge).

In Python, as far as I know, if you try to round let's say 4.6, it will give you 5, which is the "nearest integer" (not even), just like it's specified in the statement.

What am I missing?

In the description, you wrote:

• The reinforces strings consist of only small letters.

Although, as we can see in the examples, it can also include digits.

Also, "reinforces" is a verb only. The correct noun is "reinforcements".

Returning 0, as per stated in the description, involves 2 conditions:

• being a valid sequence (numerical values only)
• having NO missing numbers

As I said before, an empty sequence is either considered:

• valid AND missing some numbers (starting with 1) -> so it should return the missing number
  OR
• not valid (having no numerical values at all) -> so it should return 1

An empty sequence doesn't satisfy both conditions for returning 0.
And 1 is the missing number because as stated in the descritpion:
"Check if the elements are part of an ascending sequence of integers starting with 1".

an empty sequence is valid but missing 1
In both cases, the return value should be 1, not 0.

If the sequence is valid, the return value should be 0, not some missing value:

"1 2 3 4" -> 0  (not 5)
"1"       -> 0  (not 2)
""        -> 0  (not 1)

The description states:

if the bit is 1, swap the case; if its 0, leave it as is.

And:

When you finish with the last bit of n, start again with the first bit.

What is inconsistent here?

I agree about the bullet points layout.

In the example you gave though, "a white space" is one thing, "number of error for that letter in a field of 6" is another thing.

Maybe this would be clearer: "the number of errors as a left justified string of 6 characters long".

The white space is usually the default filling character in an aligned string (center, left or right).

In Python, the description asks for an array as output. The examples show arrays as output. And yet the tests expect a tuple.

You're right ! Somehow I saw the first note but not the last one...

It is actually still the indices, it's just that it's 1-based indexing instead of 0-based.

I agree with you though, it should be clearer - like at least mention that it's 1-based.

The description states:

Note: m, n, f, b, c are positive integers, where 0 <= m <= n or m >= n >= 0. m and n are inclusive.