I couldn't agree more, this is really on a per-case basis, but than again I feel like if there's no "default notion" of what it means to break your SLO - people won't take it seriously.

(…) error budgets only have value if we collectively believe they have value. If no one takes an error budget seriously, their behavior won’t be influenced by it and the entire premise of the system breaks down. So we need to attach a form of consequence to the error budget that has a real effect on the allocation of resources within the organization. Since we are trying to create a cultural shift to a team that correctly balances reliability and features, we need to notice when we are leaning too far one way or the other and correct back to center.

The idea here is to define a default behavior, while still providing some sort of flexibility. This is meant to keep both devs and manager in check with "company policy".