Assume that the assumptions of parallel trends and no anticipation hold. So, the problem is about interpretations rather than identificaiton.
These are non-staggered designs with binary treatment and without covariates. FE estimators are unbiased for ATEs, in which treatment effects (TEs hereafter) are weighted by population.
FE estimators give negative weights to some TEs, leading to violations of “no sign reversal”, i.e., if all individual TEs are identically signed, then the estimator should have the same sign. Even if there were no negative signs, weights may still be too different from population, making the FE estimator biased for, e.g., ATE. However, these concerns would not be consequential were TEs homogeneous (weighted average of a constant gives the same constant anyway!).
It seems difficult to maintain FE estimators in most settings, as we often use staggered designs, almost surely include covariates, and are reluctant to assume TE homogeneity.
I guess even if these tests provide some support for maintaining FE estimators, the results would only be informative by in the directional/qualitative sense. So, alternative robust estimators are needed.