Proposed resolution:

This wording is relative to N5032.

1. Modify [meta.type.synop], header <type_traits> synopsis, as indicated:

   […]
     // [meta.unary.prop], type properties
   […]
     template<class T> struct is_consteval_only;
   […]
     // [meta.unary.prop], type properties
   […]
     template<class T>
       constexpr bool is_consteval_only_v = is_consteval_only<T>::value;
   […]
   

2. Modify [tab:meta.unary.prop], Table 54 — Type property predicates as indicated:

   Template	Condition	Preconditions
   …	…	…
   template<class T> struct is_consteval_only;	T is consteval-only ([basic.types.general])	remove_all_extents_t<T> shall be a complete type or cv `void`.
   …	…	…

3. Modify [meta.syn], header <meta> synopsis, as indicated:

   […]
     // associated with [meta.unary.prop], type properties
   […]
     consteval bool is_consteval_only_type(info type);
   […]
   

4. Modify [meta.reflection.traits] as indicated:

   […]
     // associated with [meta.unary.prop], type properties
   […]
     consteval bool is_consteval_only_type(info type);
   […]
   

   -3- […]

[ Croydon 2026-03-26; move to Immediate. ]

In light of recent EWG polls related to consteval-only types, it would be improvident to ship this trait in C++26. This also resolves the NB comment requesting respecification of its precondition.