I won't argue what people should note and what not to, but I do think post manipulations like EQ are one of the more relevant things that might be noted if one is inclined to do so, given those influences are far greater than detailed lineages listing meaningless post-ADC digital chain details, or even relevant but more subtle and less influential signal chain details like microphone cables, preamps and recorders.
The most important things I personally look for in recording notes are what sources were used, what microphones were used, the microphone configuration (important yet all too often lacking), general placement, and an indication of whether any sound changing pre or post production stuff was done such as rolloffs, EQ, compression, limiting, exciters, stereo imagers or whatever. Not necessarily advocating calling all those things out and listing details about what was done, just a heads up that the recording is not a straight microphone feed. I don't care much about stuff which doesn't change the sound of the raw recording, like if it was peak normalized (which often is noted).
Mostly that gives other tapers, gear-heads and more serious collectors a heads up that there may be significant sound modifying influences beyond the mics and their configuration which affect the technical attributes of the recording, altogether separate from the quality of the music performance. Sampling various recordings made with the same microphones, listening for trends, as is done by tapers and often recommended around here as an insight into selecting appropriate microphones, is a subset of that. Once post-manipulated, a recordings strongest comp value is how good it might be made to sound.