I've had several songs rejected by a library I was trying to get approved for. The rejection reason was... "sounds too midi. Record with live instruments and submit again in 6 months." Funny thing was, there was zero midi in it. And this was a number of years ago. Some of the real tracks at that time sounded kind of wonky in some places. That has fortunately, been less of an issue in the more recent versions of BB.

Quality of the real tracks and the production are a huge factor with many libraries. I know a library is different from the monetization platforms being discussed but I think the principle is the same.

And yes, I've heard several users here post music with the same exact licks in their song as is in mine. It can and does happen when the same real tracks are used in the same style.

Regarding disclosure. I know, and you know that PG grants permission for use of it's material in our original songs. So when a library asks if I have permissions as needed, I simply state that I own 100% of the song's rights. I don't recall any of them asking for signed release documents. If it's a cowrite, I add the other writer's PRO info and everything is good. All of that is usually done in their online forms or in the original agreement you sign with them that all material you will be submitting is original, and any and all clearances have been obtained, there is no intentional copyright infringement, and you control and own 100% of the song's rights for commercial use.

You can find my music at:
www.herbhartley.com
Add nothing that adds nothing to the music.
You can make excuses or you can make progress but not both.

The magic you are looking for is in the work you are avoiding.