What a weird technicality to get caught up on. Disintegrate destroys wall of force. RAI over RAW any day. It makes absolutely no sense that you can't shoot a disintegrate wherever you want. If you're so worried about the wall being invisible, then target something behind the wall. It's a ray, and it hits the wall, and both spells explicitly say the wall is destroyed. Disintegrate also explicitly can target walls of force, even though it has the "target you can see" caveat. If a player tries to use the explicit counter to wall of force against it and you catch them on a technicality, you're harming the collaborative story. Don't exploit poor wording when the intent of both spells is clear. No one wants a DM rules lawyer.

I never said I wanted to ecologist it. I just pointed it out because it was very funny to me.

Okay. But do you actually allow any use of the spell that's not as originally intended? Because some things are technical applications of the rules which rely on rules working as intended but still in very specific way without breaking the game at all.

That one does not work RAW either way, because lungs are not an open container. But I never said I wanted to actually exploit this in a game. You can’t really exploit this one even if you want to, because it’s bound to be extremely specific. I just wanted to point out the weirdness.

Sure. The line is somewhere between "I cast minor illusion to make an image of a filing cabinet, and hide inside of it" and "I cast Shape Water to freeze that guy's blood." In the former case, the spell never says I can't hide inside the illusory object. Clever, useful, not game-breaking. In the latter case, the spell says a creature can't be inside the water, but it never says the water can't be inside the creature! Bad, shame, you lose all your spell slots until the next long rest

I defer to Miracle Max on this one,  One minute after death it's quite a corpse yet, just a creature with no hit points or death saving throws.

The last one is actually covered by it I'd say, because (as by rules of spell targeting) you cannot see the blood and furthermore (as confirmed by "Water breathing" not working in wine) spells that affect water really only affect water and that’s it. I know you mean it as a joke, but in my experience, punishing a player for trying to find out what you will and won’t allow them to do is a good way to get players that don’t want to be creative. Just tell them that you will not allow it. (Also… poor Mystra for having to waste that much divine power on someone trying to use spells in a way it can’t be used in anyway.) If everyone at your table is habilitated fun, then… well, have fun, but I'd advise against it.

Fey Ancestry just says magic can't put them to sleep. It doesn't cancel all magical effects that include putting them to sleep. But it's more complicated than that. Imprisonment has the phrase "While affected by this spell, the creature doesn't need to breathe, eat, or drink, and it doesn't age." So, if you get rid of the only other effect (sleeping), does that mean they're not affected by the spell, and thus they do need to breathe, eat, etc.? Or does the spell affect them, because it still makes it so they don't need to eat, breathe, etc.? Though you could argue that that's not the only effect of the spell. It also makes it so that you'll be detected by Detect Magic. Being an elf doesn't stop that, so you still won't need to breathe, eat, etc. Unless someone casts Nystul's Magic Aura.

I’d say RAI the answer is obvious. But by RAW it’s unspecified, so both could be true.

Can't target the wall itself but the spell absolutley hits the wall if it's a ray