Impressive! Very complete on first glance. You might want to soften or qualify the RTOS statement so people focus on its compactness and low latency. As you are already seeing in the comments the RTOS aspect has a lot of opinions depending on what one is trying to accomplish.

RTOS can be used a lot looser than you describe. Like a build system, scheduling, and interrupt framework that allows you to program an MCU like you describe. Zephyr RTOS and Free RTOS provide easy enough ways to write code that uses blocking APIs but probably runs your code according to the timing constraints if you hold it right. As an alternative, you could write for “bare metal” and handle the control flow, scheduling, interrupting, etc. yourself. If you are writing to “random” addresses according to some datasheet to effect some real world change, you are probably reaching for an RTOS or bare metal unless you are writing OS driversn. If you look at the linux drivers, you will see a lot of similarities to the Zephyr RTOS drivers, but one of them is probably clocking in the MHz while the other in the GHz

You're probably thinking of a hard real-time RTOS with time slices and WCET constraints.

For soft real-time, you basically only need low latency.

Threads with priorities, synchronization primitives and some way of handling interrupts is generally considered good enough.

From the description, this sounds like the kind of RTOS that runs most embedded RT applications currently if perhaps a bit heavier in features than the average with filesystem and networking support.

> It's actual rocket science, as no systemic mistakes are allowed

Lots of everyday stuff is running on bare metal code that exceeds so-called "real time" requirements without an OS at all, and those programmers are definitely not rocket scientists! :)