Just once I would like to read someone that takes a descriptivist approach to commit messages instead of a prescriptivist approach. I would prefer even a scientific approach where someone sets out to measure if these sorts of measures have a concrete measurable effect beyond people's anecdotal preferences.
Prescribing what a commit message can look like implicitly prescribes what a commit can look like and that turns a flexible tool into a less flexible one. For many people, lack of flexibility can be a feature... but it is an empirical question on whether or not if it aids development and I am not really aware of anyone trying to measure these things. In the spirit of "No silver bullet," by Fred Brooks, I am skeptical that between the code comments, the code documentation, and the ticketing system that the git commits are adding much.