Question on how are this coding standards used in the Quality Reports of Adobe Commerce Marketplace

### Description

This is more of a question. I found this repository through the link to a Magento extension for passed Coding Standards.

My particular concern is the filesystem. I looked over the https://github.com/magento/magento-coding-standard/tree/develop/Magento2/Sniffs/Functions/DiscouragedFunctionSniff.php, and it made me think that it only warns about any of those functions.

Is the Magento Marketplace rejecting extensions that use direct filesystem functions, making them incompatible with remote storage? We did face this kind of extension when buying directly from vendors not listed on the Marketplace, and we'd like to know how much to trust the Marketplace for all the Quality Reports.

### Expected behaviour
Any listed extension in the Marketplace with a passed Coding Standard would not have any warnings and work 100% with remote storage.

### Benefits
All extensions would be remote storage compatible.

### Additional information
Trust that these tests are enforced for Adobe Commerce Marketplace and don't allow warnings.

Start by reading Magento2/Sniffs/Functions/DiscouragedFunctionSniff.php and the repository description of its coding standards. Then verify how the Adobe Commerce Marketplace uses passed Coding Standards and Quality Reports, including whether warnings are rejected and whether this establishes remote-storage compatibility. Done means documenting a clear answer to those policy questions.

Written by the indexing model from the issue text.