Response to an article you wrote on the issue of D' Shomirim B\

In the article you wrote, you raised a question: Why does the Gemara list four guards? If the Gemara says that there are four guards and their law is three. If the situation dictates, then it should also have appointed a loss guard, a craftsman, etc., and if the law dictates, then only three guards should have been appointed without a tenant?
And maybe it can be justified in this way. I would appreciate the Rabbi's opinion on the matter.
The Mishnah wrote down all the options.
First drawing – that keeps an object without using it. For free. = Free saver
Second drawing – one who guards an object without using it. For a fee. = A wage keeper
Third drawing – which keeps an object with use. Free. = Asks.
A fourth drawing that keeps an object with use. For hire. = renter.
And a guardian of loss is not a new drawing, but rather the same drawing of either A or B. The conditions were divided as to which drawing of the Torah it resembles. But it is not a "new type" because it guards an object without using it, and the only question is whether it is called one who receives a reward and is similar to the second drawing of the Torah or one who does not receive one and is therefore similar to the first drawing.
But a "tenant" is a case and a new type of guardian. And the question is only what his "law" is.
I would appreciate the Rabbi's response.
And I really enjoyed reading your article on this matter, it made me very smart!!