A small fit-feedback table could make reports on the star-fit mount much easier to compare: file revision, material, slicer scale, the mating feature measured on the original foot, the matching printed dimension, and whether the adapter seats fully or rocks. For the star profile, mark the exact pair of flats or points used for the measurement; the overall X/Y size alone will not describe that interface.
It may also help to offer a short test piece containing only the mating profile before users print a complete set of adapters. Record the intended clearance in the model separately from any slicer dimensional compensation, so feedback can distinguish a geometry change from a printing adjustment.
We are the CADProps team. For the digital side of that checklist, can open STL/STEP files in a browser and inspect dimensions without installing CAD software. The physical fit measurements from Ender-5 Max owners would still be the key evidence here. Would you be willing to include the target interface dimensions with the next revision?