Abstract: Curious about a report of disagreement between ratings of restrictiveness of methodological constraints in Computer-Aided Software Engineering (CASE) tools, two inspection-style studies were carried out to determine the extent of variation in end-users' beliefs about methodological constraint environments in CASE tools. The extent of variation was found to be significant. Major variations in belief were caused by varying use of the methodology checker, inability to create proper tests for the presence of constraints, and ambiguity in natural language expressions of the methodological constraints under inspection. Our findings have important implications for CASE tool design and construction regarding the methodology checker, support for alternative approaches to design work, and the human-computer interface. Researchers must also take cognizance of individual variation when searching for the 'ideal' methodological constraint environment