consistency check action too aggressive in checking coverage

[reteprelief]

It currently checks that each transition covers all error events and all error sinks.
It should check that for a given error state there exists an outgoing transition that references each error event/incoming propagation.

In general we need to revisit all consistency checking rules as to whether they are too strict.
See http://aadl.info/aadl/osate/osate-doc/osate-emv2/consistency.html for the consistency rules being checked. We also need to make sure they align with the consistency rules in the standard.

[reteprelief]

Temporarily removed action from menu.