MicrosoftIrinaWins given the very limited metadata recorded when records are destroyed, my recommendation is to use the disposition review option as a heads-up for records managers to go back to the original document library, review the content, export the full set of metadata (which includes the original document library location) and save that to another location (such as an 'Archives' site, which is what we used), then return to the dispositions area to do the deletion (to keep the records there). Then delete the original library, otherwise you will end up with a library that has nothing in it and nothing showing why. It might sound like a lot of work but in practice it's not that bad, especially if you have set up document libraries well (e..g., to map them to activities in a function-mapped site).
Also, in most cases you cannot reasonably expect end-users to apply label-based retention policies in their mailboxes. I think it's safer to go with a single retention period (say 10 years) for all mailboxes and a longer retention (or permanent retention) policy for specific mailboxes.
Remember too that copies of Teams chat messages are copied from the backend Azure database to either personal (1:1 chat) or Microsoft 365 Group (channel chat) mailboxes. Increasingly I see the value of using Microsoft 365 Groups (with a mailbox and SPO site, linked to a Team if required) to manage specific types of records.
In the meantime, while I understand Microsoft's idea of using AI as much as possible to automate the classification and retention/disposal of records, I see too much risk in applying these advanced Information Governance options (aka 'records management') except in specific situations.
