Terms like "correct" and "right" might imply the condition might be checked further beside the value being inside the acceptable parameters, so it’s good to stay away from that.
Terms like "normal" might imply not the specific condition or even worse a comparison with some historic averages.
For that reason having a less loaded term (implying you are only comparing the reading with the procedures/specification tolerances) seems to be a good choice.
The usual definition of the term „nominal“ coming from its origin („of name“ or „as it is named“) somehow reflects that in a double way. First, it references the fact that you are talking about the „numerical reading“, not the actual condition and secondly that somebody has called out for an expected value for the current condition.
Webster actually defines two meanings which both apply to those mentioned aspects:
: of, being, or relating to a designated or theoretical size that may vary from the actual : APPROXIMATE
the pipe's nominal size
And the actual definition used in aviation/engineering:
: being according to plan : SATISFACTORY
everything was nominal during the launch