I think your explanation misses the basic point of what the filter is doing.
This is not a filter that protects downstream machinery from particulate abrasion, nor is it a fitter that is sanitizing the air like a HEPA room filter would do. So what is its job?
The purpose of this filter is to prevent a cloud of dust from behind the vacuum and, to an extent, to prevent broadcasting the finer particulate onto tabletops or aggravating allergies.
Of course, a cleaner filter will do a better job of vacuuming by passing more air and allowing higher suction. And, a cleaner filter will probably have less backside residue to re-broadcast. So it is a matter of what is “acceptable”.
Washing the face of the filter will remove front-side particulate and open up the filter for better suction (airflow.) Washing the backside will remove anything ready to be projected out the backside.
But the concern about creating microscopic holes that may let a small amount of microscopic material re-deposit back where it started (most likely the carpet) is to worry about the negligible. This is not a room HEPA filter scouring the room of COVID-19 viruses.
And, finally, I think perspective is warranted about replacing these filters. The cost is negligible…whether it is $2 or $10 a filter, it works out to pennies an hour for a device that replaces a $20 to $50 an hour housekeeper. My view is that replacing the filter every week–or frequently–is a small cost in proportion to the work the vacuum is doing. (Something akin to begrudging the cost of replacing oil on a car with disregard to the value and purpose of the oil…to mix metaphors.)
So you replace the filter every week or two or whenever. The cost remains small. So why not just do it? At $5 or $10 a filter this works out to about 15 minutes of housekeeper’s time. Or, do you also wash out your big vacuum filters to save their $10 cost? (Oh, right, none of us robot vacuum people have vacuumed the house in years:)