I like a lot of your thoughts here John. However, I really disagree with not mentioning the model of disc. Why would you avoid this?
For me, it shows how someone is approaching a hole before they throw it, and therefore allows me to spend less mental energy figuring out where the disc is going to go/what shot will be thrown. I can watch the player throw, then after looking at their form, I can move my eyes to the shot because I know ahead of time (roughly) where it's going/how it's going to fly.
I also get a clearer insight into their thinking. This was especially important while watching a tournament at high altitude where discs are flying differently. When I watched the live coverage of the tournament and McBeth threw his drive on 18 (final round), I thought "nah that doesn't go OB since it's a Force, it'll get down quickly." When I watched Jomez and saw that Paul threw an Undertaker, I understood why Paul was yelling "Get down." He was afraid the understable disc would never flip up and keep riding left. Adding little tidbits like that add to the coverage for smarter players.
If you don't want to provide "unpaid ads" for companies, I get that. But even saying "overstable mid" or "straight fairway" would help. Might be a bit awkward at first since the norms of disc golf lingo shy away from those terms, but it wouldn't take long for them to become normal since they clearly communicate the idea.
Anyway, sorry for the wall of thoughts, I'd love to hear why you don't like it. You've thought about coverage details much more than I have.