No.
But I've found that it is useful to reflect once in a while on whether how we've been playing (i.e. "what makes sense to us") continues to jive with the basics of the game. Occasionally the ship drifts off course. YMMV
I would say that the ship goes on the course that makes the most sense to the DM and group and there's nothing wrong with that.
And to some, the books contain lots of rules to support the DM in running the game (and, indeed, the players in helping the DM to run the game). Where one decides to draw the line between "hard rules" and "guidance" is completely arbitrary per the "ruling not rules" uber-advice, wouldn't you say?
The text is quite explicit: make the game your own.
Not sure why this is even a thing in this discussion. Perhaps we could keep the mud on the ground, yes?
Maybe it's S.A.D. talking, but it's just kind of a pet peeve of mine that people trot out sections of text and say "See! This is the way! Any other way means you're doing it wrong!" Then you seemed to double down on it.
So I mean no offense, and I don't know how to state it without sounding like that but telling other people how to play a game comes off as holier than thou. The keeper of the sacred text. The OP was very, very specific on what they consider "correct". That the role of the player is very limited, that declarations
must be done in a specific fashion. It's just odd to me and doesn't match up with what I've seen in actual games or on the handful of game streams that I've watched.
Sometimes players add bits and pieces to the lore and story, especially if it has no immediate impact. How much and how often this happens varies widely from table to table, as it should IMHO. Frequently players ask to make perception or insight checks instead of declaring a more generic what they're doing then waiting for the DM to call for a check. For that matter I can't remember ever seeing, in person or on a stream, a DM ask for a Wisdom (perception) check.
One of the big selling points of the current iteration of D&D (especially after the last couple of editions seemed to want to force a specific style) is that people make the game their own. I think that's a good thing and quite honestly don't see the point of "revisiting the basics".
In other words, it's one thing to say "This is how I do it and why it works for me". It's another to say "If you don't do it this way you aren't really role playing." So I do apologize if what I'm saying sounds insulting, and maybe I need to spend more time with my sun lamp or head to warmer (and brighter) climes for a bit. I just don't know how else to state it. There is no one true way.