A different interpretation as to why high CRI may be preferred by our visual system is from the predictive coding perspective and how color constancy works in visual perception.
If we take color constancy processes to be our mind trying to predict what the surface reflectance of an object is given the available information, then the wider the spectra of the illumination source, the better the cues our visual system has access to for inferring the surface colors of objects. You could imagine an extreme where you have a single wavelength light source like a sodium vapor lamp (the orange lights that might illuminate a parking lot) and how that impacts your ability to differentiate colors of objects in your environment, since different surfaces would give your eyes the same information in that lighting environment. You would be unable to differentiate between several surface colors, and this is a widely done demonstration in psychology perception courses. This would be the worst case scenario and corresponds to a low CRI, whereas a high CRI light would give you better information about the colors present in the environment.
Better information leads to less guesswork by your visual system and minimizing prediction error might be something preferred by your mind.
Relatedly, having bright enough lights to activate your cones for color perception also matters. In dim environments we mostly use scotopic vision through our rods, which does not allow us to perceive color since it is a single receptor system. Anecdotally, I prefer times of the day where sunlight contains the more broad spectrum versus near sunset when it is both distorted by our atmosphere and also dimmer to the point where you start to perceive less color. The latter point can also be observed more saliently during solar eclipses. The spectra remains the same since the sun is not distorted by our atmosphere, but nevertheless dims enough that you start seeing less color around you outside.
My point was that if you were trying to infer ‘true’ surface reflectance of objects under daylight, while only having luminance info from a single wavelegth light source, you would end up with high prediction error about the properties of those surfaces.
So yes, I was only referring to the case where the observer has a reference with which to compare the objects to. I did not have in mind the case where we would be naive observers having 0 experience with the world around us. My suggestion was motivated by my intuition about our everyday experience, and not meant to be an absolute truth about human biology.
In response to tinted sunglasses, I would venture that you would not wear them if you were trying to perform a task that involved ‘accurate’ color perception e.g. going to an art museum, watching a movie, seeing a sunset. As an aside, I do avoid them because I enjoy my sense of color perception in general.