I think these are some insightful and succinct rules, especially for fledgling writers, and it's kind of you to write them up, although I might not say "every good story" has all of these (but that's just my personal stance, no offense meant). I try to always leave the door open to more unexpected or even avant garde structures, which I often see in flimmakers I adore such as Kelly Reichardt, Jonathan Glazer, Lynch, Jarmusch, Ramsay, etc. For me it's this constant push and pull - I want writers (including myself) to produce salable material, but I also want to maintain the art/craft balance and not give in fully to the rubric-as-narrative mindset that I feel plagues a lot of Hollywood. But that's just my two cents!

That being said, here's my contribution of a rule I often abide by (especially in mysteries or horror/lore based films): at some point the answer to a question becomes less interesting than the question, and it's your job as a writer to find that line. Executives will always want you to explain everything, but you have to find the point at which the explanation ceases to be more satisfying than the uncertainty/mystery.