In Boyer-Moore theory, all functions are total - you can apply any function to any object. Types are predicates. Here's a definition of ORDERED for a list of number:
(DEFN ORDERED (L)
(IF (LISTP L)
(IF (LISTP (CDR L))
(IF (LESSP (CADR L)
(ORDERED (CDR L)))
When you prove things using definitions like this, there's a lot of case analysis. This gets worse combinatorially; a theorem with four variables with type constraints will generate at least 2⁴ cases, only one of which is interesting. Most of the cases, such as when L is not a list, are trivial, but have to be analyzed. Computers are great at this, and the Boyer-Moore prover deals with those cases without any trouble. But it went against a long tradition in mathematics of avoiding case analysis. That made this approach unpopular with the generation of pre-computer mathematicians. Today, it would be more acceptable.
(It's fun to run the Boyer-Moore prover today. In the 1980s, it took 45 minutes to grind through the basic theory of numbers. Now it takes a few seconds.)