1. No. It is likely to be understood anyway since a literal interpretation will be dismissed as nonsense [especially by the apologist crowd (They know who they are) ].

2. Yes, unless the literal meaning is intended.

3. Yes. "[I]mprove on/upon" at least lends a degree of separation between the verb and object, albeit not as an adequate improvement. Agreed that "improve upon" does sound as if to imply replacement vice adjustment, but it still 'improves upon' the lame construction given.