I have a specific word in mind, but I'd rather not use it to avoid potential bias. I'll edit and post the word if I need to.

Hypothetically, I have a word, "CanHoldWater", defined by Merriam-Webster as
  
*Adjective*  
A) capable of holding water  
B) *In biology:* capable of holding water overnight  

So, if we know a ficus can 'hold water', but just not overnight. Is the statement: "This is a CanHoldWater ficus." true or false?

I would believe that you can use the word intending the second definition, but that the primary definition shouldn't be violated. Is this just a semantics argument that has no answer? Are there written or unwritten rules to creating definitions with this type of scenario in mind?

If this isn't a sufficient example, I'll provide the actual word after some input. In my mind it mirrors the problem with the actual word in my view pretty well, but it's politically loaded.

------------------------------------------------------------------