The parts of the questionnaire that I'm struggling with are the words "tedious" and "bookkeeping."
Almost everything in D&D involves changing numbers and keeping track of those changes: from AC to XP, hit points to spell slots, gold coins to silver arrows, ki points and spell points and grit. It's all Uses of X per Y, where X is a feature and Y is the reset. And that is always going to be a form of bookkeeping, and it is always going to be tedious...but the amount of bookkeeping (and the tedium that comes with it) will vary from table to table.
Importantly, this has nothing to do with balance. Powerful abilities are always going to be powerful whether your character can cast them once in their lifetime, or every six seconds. The DM builds the world and the encounters, and thus can throttle the power level of an ability easily. A character that can cast Fireball every round is easily to balance, just by filling the dungeon with creatures that have Evasion, or immunity to fire, or the ability to Counterspell every round, etc. The player will obviously be frustrated, but is it any more frustrating than "here's this super-cool ability! Too bad you can only use it X times per Whatever."
So I voted No. I understand that the rules need to be written in a balanced and easy-to-track manner, yes, but they also need a DM to interpret them for their specific table and players.
An example of tedious bookkeeping used to (allegedly) "balance" a powerful ability is the
stupidly broken PF1e feat "Sacred Geometry."
The TL;DR is, you have to roll a set of d6 equal to your K(Eng) ranks. You get two (effectively) free MM feats, which you can apply to this (and any other MM feats you know)
spontaneously without raising the spell slot level, IF you can perform a random numerology puzzle to do so. There are various "prime constants" you must match with the aforementioned Nd6, which can be operated upon using any combination of +, -, ×, /, and parentheses. If you cannot produce the required prime constant, the spell fails and is lost.
E.g., say you have 8 ranks in K(Eng). You want to cast
quickened magic missile. You do still need to be able to cast spells at that effective spell level (e.g. a 5th level slot in this case), but the spell you actually cast will be 1st level. You roll your 8d6 and get {5, 5, 6, 4, 6, 5, 5, 3}. The "prime constants" for an effective 5th level spell are 43, 47, 53. This can be done with 6×(6+3)-5/5+(5-5)×(4) = 6×(9)-1+0 = 54-1 = 53. There are several other patterns which could be used to hit one of the other target numbers. Folks have crunched the numbers (as have I), and even with only 8 dice you have like a 99% chance of being able to pull off any prime number you want. (It helps to know that all primes greater than 3 can be written as one more or one less than a multiple of 6.)
The problem is, actually doing this at the table? Incredibly tedious! I was only able to do the above as quickly as I did because I've
practiced this for actual use in a real (but very gonzo) epic PF1e game. (Believe it or not, using this feat was genuinely 100% in keeping with the theme of the character! I chose to only use it for buff spells for myself and my fellow players, to limit the tedium to daily stuff that I could do between sessions.)
That is exactly the kind of thing being described when one speaks of tedium being used to balance out power. Perhaps a more pointed case than most, but you wanted an example, and this is about as clear as it can get.