What's a schematic?
It's a written document, it conveys information.
Does the information need to be there? Avoid omissions, and avoid redundancy.
Obviously, you can't put everything on the schematic. Some of it is going to end up somewhere else: a BOM, for example. If it's better placed elsewhere, then... why not?
In EDA, I tend to use only one parameter. The data is accessible elsewhere, whether it's an Altium Smart PDF, or in the BOM, or if you have the luxury of viewing the source files.
In written schematics, I've been known to indicate whatever is important: a component value of course, but also voltage or current, a recommended part series, limiting ESR/ESL, etc.
Whether you want to put that on the (EDA) schematic as well, is up to you. I don't, because I think the added clutter and space taken up isn't worth the slight increase in availability.
I've seen schematics with secondary and tertiary parameters, usually V/A/W rating and footprint/package size. I've also seen (a vast majority of) schematics clearly without an aesthetic design behind them. I suspect most engineers don't actually want to be engineers, and self-flagellate with ugly schematics, UGLY_NAMESWITH_CAPS and so on. Like this stuff
should be hard, and that difficulty should be taken out on themselves, and anyone else who might happen across those documents.
But then, I'm pretty sure managers feel the same way, and they are the ones making purchasing decisions on software. So you have it, that almost all professional software is ass, too.
Uh, anyway, cynicism aside, that's my opinion.
Tim