Yes, officially this is a documentation bug.  From [the *Absent Fields* doc][1]:

> Fields that are not always guaranteed to be set... are indicated in the per-type documentation. **Any discrepency(sic) between observed behavior and the documentation should be reported on Stack Apps.**

(Emphasis added and note that "discrepancy" is mispellerized. ;) )


----------
`notice` obviously should have the `may be absent` flag.  
I eyeballed all of the other properties of [type question][2], as well as [type answer][3] and [type user][4].  I didn't spot any other obvious discrepancies with the `may be absent` flag.


  [1]: https://api.stackexchange.com/docs/absent-fields
  [2]: https://api.stackexchange.com/docs/types/question
  [3]: https://api.stackexchange.com/docs/types/answer
  [4]: https://api.stackexchange.com/docs/types/user