Very nice.

Good suggestion to "patch the blown highlight area",
but I'm not going to crop or darken the lefthand edge.

Entirely up to you, but it would be a better picture if you were to heed Roy's advice, as I am oft entreated to. The relative lightness on the West side draws the eye away from the main subject, instead of allowing the tree and West bank to frame and hold the composition together, which it's perfectly placed to do..

Load of twaddle. It's the lefthand tree that makes the picture.

It does make the picture - disjointed and confusing to the eye.

I agree that the patch of grass is overbright, but otherwise it's fine.

But if you insist on cropping it, why not move the boat at the same time,
and add a Shepperton swan to boot.

Because the boat is fine where it is and a swan (like the light left-hand edge of the picture) would draw the eye away from the boat.

Would you crop the tree in the second photo?

Ah, I see that you've already answered that question.
You want to crop the path, which is an integral part of the picture.

No; I wouldn't crop it. But I've been told by someone with a better sense of composition than I that the eye must be drawn into a picture, and not led out of it, which over-light peripheral detail (especially when close to one side) tends to do.

Yes, the path leads alongside the river.

Here the eye is led where you want it to be led. But I would (especially as there is so much of it) emphasise the dappled light on the path by darkening it and raising the contrast locally.

Gentle dappled light along this riverside path.

It will still be gentle.