There's a few things at play here. One is talking only about the positive results from the previous Jepsen analysis, while not discussing the negative ones. Vendors often try to represent findings in the most positive light, but this was a particularly extreme case. Not discussing default behavior is a significant oversight, and it's especially important given ~80% of people run with default write concern, and 99% run with default read concern.

The middle part of the report talks about unexpected but (almost all) documented behavior around read and write concern for transactions. I don't want to conjecture too much about motivations here, but based on my professional experience with a few dozen databases, and surveys of colleagues, I termed it "surprising". The fact that there's explicit documentation for what I'd consider Counterintuitive API Design suggests that this is something MongoDB engineers considered, and possibly debated, internally.

The final part of the report talks about what I'm pretty sure are bugs. I'm strongly suspicious of the retry mechanism: it's possible that an idempotency token doesn't exist, isn't properly used, or that MongoDB's client or server layers are improperly interpreting an indeterminate failure as a determinate one. It seems possible that all 4 phenomena we observed stem from the retry mechanism, but as discussed in the report, it's not entirely clear that's the case.