My own interpretation (which effectively matches the right-left rule, at least algorithmically) is that, (), [], and * are operators, which have different semantics at the declaration vs the 'usage/expression' level, where:
() and [] are right-associative unary type-operators, with high fixity, (or equivalently, binary type-operators when () or [] have arguments)
and * is a binary type-operator, with low fixity (i.e. lower than () or [] ), where the 'left' argument is effectively the context that's left after removing the asterisk and the 'right' argument (rather than what's to the left of the asterisk in a purely 'anatomical 'sense')
(whereas, at the expression level, * is a unary value-operator instead, while () and [] behave the same as in their type-form, except acting as value-operators instead)
() and [] are right-associative unary type-operators, with high fixity, (or equivalently, binary type-operators when () or [] have arguments)
and * is a binary type-operator, with low fixity (i.e. lower than () or [] ), where the 'left' argument is effectively the context that's left after removing the asterisk and the 'right' argument (rather than what's to the left of the asterisk in a purely 'anatomical 'sense')
(whereas, at the expression level, * is a unary value-operator instead, while () and [] behave the same as in their type-form, except acting as value-operators instead)