Most conventional test coverage tools answer the "forward" coverage question: developers want to know what code the tests exercise or miss.
Reverse coverage, by contrast, is relatively specialised. One main application of it is in the context of big, complex, automated integration builds, where you only want to re-run the subset of tests that depend on the code that changed with each commit, rather than the full test suite.
As a result, reverse coverage support tends to be obscure, or locked away inside heavy-weight distributed build systems (such as Google's formerly in-house Bazel).