Sure. It's just a happy accident that it sets a perfect trap for metagaming.
I don't think worrying about metagaming is about policing the thoughts of the players. It's about preventing their characters from acting on information the character wouldn't have. I don't care what the player knows or thinks. I only care if they try to get their character to act on that info as a means to gain some advantage in the game. It just makes it much easier to deal with running a game that's enjoyable for everyone at the table if the players don't try to pretend that their characters (miraculously all their characters) somehow have this weird perfect recall of the entirety of the monster manuals of every edition of the game and every published adventure ever written. It's adversarial play. It's the player trying to "win" a game that doesn't have a win condition.
To borrow from Colville, it's bad sportsmanship. I dislike that phrase used in this context because it suggests that playing D&D is a sport and that there are winning and losing sides. Which is fundamentally not the case. But the idea holds. It's bad sportsmanship to read the monster manual for clues on how to beat monsters the DM has put in front of you. It's bad sportsmanship to leverage player knowledge to try to win the game against the DM. Players that are that invested in winning are entirely missing the point of the game.
