We've got a couple of tags that don't describe the topic of the question, but rather describe the kind of answer being sought. system-agnostic and mechanics/rules-lawyering/rules-as-written are pretty obvious, and there may be others I'm not aware of.
Looking at the tagging section of the our help pages, we get a pretty clear description of what a tag is:
A tag is a word or phrase that describes the topic of the question. Tags are a means of connecting experts with questions they will be able to answer by sorting questions into specific, well-defined categories.
Tags can also be used to help you identify questions that are interesting or relevant to you.
From this, it seems like tags should be used to describe questions, not answers.
To give a reductio ad absurdum example of why I think this could be a problem, please consider that this seems like precedent for realism,narrativist/simulationist/gamist, i-already-know-fate-is-about-story, experience-based, dont-tell-me-monks-suck, and so forth: all of these describe the kind of answers that are expected, rather than the kind of question being asked, and do very little in terms of attracting experts or helping people find relevant questions later on.
Really, "I would like X kind of answer" is better kept to the body of the question, where it can be explained and put in context. We're already seeing the extant tags being misapplied.
So: Why do we need this kind of tag? Can we take a good hard look at this practice?