Board Thread:Wiki Discussion/@comment-32744161-20180513194903/@comment-47205-20180513213016

Most creatures' morphologies are at least loosely based on real-world taxa, even if they don't closely resemble any individual real-world species, so we should try to ensure that is maintained the taxon definitions, and avoid descriptions that might cause confusion there. As you say, we should e.g. classify fish-like creatures in Pisces even if they don't have vertical jaws, so defining Chordata as requiring vertical jaws at the phylum level, only to go back on that for various orders, would be extremely unhelpful.

Some of the class-level descriptions you provide seem to be improvements over the current ones (e.g. Reptilia, Mammalia), but I will say that requiring a larval form for Amphibia is a terrible idea: creatures that highly resemble real-world amphibians would be excluded purely on the grounds that their creator didn't make a larval form.