What is the primary characteristic of a limited assurance engagement?

In a limited assurance engagement, the primary characteristic is the practitioner's expression of a negative form of conclusion. This means that the practitioner is stating that nothing has come to their attention that causes them to believe that the information provided is materially misstated. This contrasts with reasonable assurance engagements, where a more extensive investigation results in an affirmative opinion regarding the reliability of the information.

Limited assurance engagements typically do not require as extensive evidence collection as those providing a higher level of assurance since the aim is to form a conclusion based on a smaller scope of work. This nature of the engagement leads to a less rigorous investigation and enables the practitioner to express their conclusion in a negative form.

The other characteristics mentioned in the options do not accurately reflect the essence of limited assurance. For instance, providing a high level of assurance indicates a thorough examination and a positive opinion, which is contrary to the nature of limited assurance. Similarly, a definitively conclusive outcome implies certainty that is not characteristic of limited assurance, where the conclusion is more about the absence of significant issues rather than definitive reliability. Therefore, the nature of evidence collection in these engagements is also less intensive compared to those requiring high assurance, but the core focus remains on the negative form of conclusion.