Conflict assessment is a critical process in understanding the dynamics, causes, and potential trajectories of conflicts, serving as a foundation for effective conflict management, transformation, and peacebuilding initiatives. Despite its importance, conflict assessment is subject to a range of limitations that can affect its accuracy, relevance, and applicability in real-world contexts. These limitations arise from methodological, contextual, human, and systemic factors, which can influence how conflicts are interpreted and addressed. Understanding these limitations is essential for practitioners and policymakers to avoid overconfidence in assessments and to design interventions that are both realistic and context-sensitive. One of the primary limitations of conflict assessment lies in the challenge of obtaining accurate and comprehensive information. Conflicts, especially in fragile or high-intensity environments, are often characterized by secrecy, misinformation, and competing narratives. Stakeholders may withhold information intentionally due to fear, mistrust, or political motivations, while others may exaggerate or distort realities to gain advantage. As a result, conflict assessments may rely on incomplete or biased data, limiting the reliability of the analysis. Furthermore, access to conflict zones may be restricted due to security risks, bureaucratic obstacles, or logistical challenges, preventing assessors from conducting field-based observations that are often critical for understanding the local dynamics and lived experiences of affected communities. Another significant limitation is the subjective nature of analysis and interpretation. Conflict assessments typically involve qualitative and quantitative methods, including interviews, surveys, focus groups, and secondary data reviews. However, the process of interpreting this information is influenced by the assessor's perspectives, cultural background, and theoretical frameworks. Analysts may unconsciously prioritize certain narratives or indicators over others, leading to skewed representations of the conflict. Cognitive biases such as confirmation bias, where information that aligns with pre-existing beliefs is emphasized,