The method, before the laboratory.
What is measured, under what conditions, against what acceptance criterion, and with what traceability. Published ahead of the chamber they run in, deliberately. Lunar qualification has no agreed standard yet, and the standard gets written around whoever puts a real method on the table first. This is ours. Each document carries its own number, version, licence, and limits, and every one of them is open to being argued with.
Two documents, numbered and citable. No test house in this market publishes either one.
Test Method: In-Vacuum Wavefront Error of a Solid Retroreflector
How the wavefront error of a retroreflector is measured with the article at temperature under vacuum, including what the method does not establish.
Read the documentWorked Uncertainty Budget: In-Vacuum Interferometric Wavefront Error
The same measurement's uncertainty worked end to end: nine terms named, combined, expanded, and set against the acceptance criterion to show what the measurement can decide.
Read the documentThe scope publishes here, inline, next to the service it covers.
An ISO/IEC 17025 scope of accreditation lists calibration and measurement capability uncertainty per parameter and per range. It is the most useful document an accredited laboratory owns, and almost every one of them buries it behind a badge. Ours publishes here in full and inline, next to the service it covers, the day it is issued. A laboratory that will not show you its uncertainties is asking you to take its numbers on faith.
Tell us where the method is wrong.
These are published early on purpose. A method that has already been used to accept hardware is a method that is expensive to change, and this is the cheapest moment in its life to find out it is wrong.