[RPG] Can the whisper of a Message spell be heard over loud ambient noise

I did some research and cannot find any sort of official ruling for this. Although it seems to me the the answer is clear.

You can whisper messages and receive whispered replies. Those nearby can hear these messages with a DC 25 Perception check. You point your finger at each creature you want to receive the message. When you whisper, the whispered message is audible to all targeted creatures within range. Magical silence, 1 foot of stone, 1 inch of common metal (or a thin sheet of lead), or 3 feet of wood or dirt blocks the spell. The message does not have to travel in a straight line. It can circumvent a barrier if there is an open path between you and the subject, and the path's entire length lies within the spell's range. The creatures that receive the message can whisper a reply that you hear. The spell transmits sound, not meaning; it doesn't transcend language barriers. To speak a message, you must mouth the words and whisper.

By RAW, it specifically says the in the spell, you must mouth the words and whisper.

As for how you should rule? What makes sense for your campaign? Vote, houserule, or go by what the spell says.

I don't have any knowledge of how long is too long for a message cantrip. However, I do not believe the DM should allow a player to send a message that is too long and truncate it for the recipient.

D&D is not themed or focused around discovering new abilities hidden inside you and learning their strengths and limitations. It's reasonable to assume that a wizard who has fireball written in his or her spellbook knows the range and blast radius of that spell, even if he or she doesn't know the exact damage in terms of polyhedral dice and hit points. Perhaps it's encoding in the arcane glyphs used to write the spell in their spellbook, perhaps the wizard has tested the spell before rushing into battle and scribbled some notes and targeting information in the margin, or perhaps it's just that wizards who cast fireballs on themselves don't tend to last very long.

On top of that, message is a cantrip, which is a spell that the caster knows like the back of his or her hand.

Repeated practice has fixed the spell in the caster's mind and infused the caster with the magic needed to produce the effect over and over. (PHB 201)

I find it highly unlikely that a caster would not know the limitations of their own cantrip, and if a player of mine attempted to do something outside of those limitations (ie, send a longer message), I would stop them. It's similar to how you wouldn't let a player attempt to coerce a black dragon with gold just because the player read the Monster Manual. Their character doesn't necessarily know that black dragons are greedy; that decision doesn't make sense in the context of roleplaying because the character doesn't have the knowledge needed to make that decision. With this, the problem is reversed; the character has more information than the player, and because of that increased knowledge would not make the decision their player wants them to. As a DM, I would notify the player that they're overstepping the bounds of the spell and allow them to rephrase their message or rethink what they want to do. DMs often punish metagaming because players who do metagame to the extent that it impacts everyone else's fun often have other issues that make them less fun to play with. However, with..."eso-gaming"? ("meta" means outside in Greek; esoteric means inside. I'm thinking too hard about this.) With "esogaming", a player could be sleepy, read through their character sheet too fast, didn't realize you've come up with an alternative house rule for this situation, or had a different interpretation of a vaugly-worded spell or ability (as is the case here). Correct them gently and I doubt they will make the same mistake again.