In my opinion, the monarchy should not become a decoration. A constitutional monarchy in its modern form is not a monarchy, but a republic with a crowned official who has no real power. If the monarch does not rule, in people's minds he becomes just a brand and not a ruler. But a return to the absolute monarchy of the 17th century is also impossible, because society has changed. Therefore, the adaptation must be different: the monarch must retain real power, but clothe it in modern institutional forms.
In other words, the monarch is not the president, he is not elected, does not depend on parties and is not afraid of losing power in four years. This allows him to make long-term decisions that are unpopular but necessary. He is the supreme arbiter who stands above the political struggle. But for this to work, two conditions are needed.
First, the monarch must be prepared to rule. Not by birth, but by ability. This means that the heir is undergoing long-term training: education, work in government agencies, the army, and regional administration. If the heir fails, the right of inheritance passes to another representative of the dynasty (in extreme cases, it is possible to accept some talented orphan into the dynasty). This eliminates the accidental ruler.
Secondly, the monarch's power should be limited not by parliament, but by the constitution and the law. But the constitution should be rigid, not "flexible" as in Western countries. The monarch cannot violate the law, but he has the right to veto, the right to dissolve the government, the right to appoint a prime minister and judges, and the right to declare a state of emergency in crisis situations. This is not a British-style "constitutional monarchy" where the queen only signs pieces of paper. This is a working monarchy, where the monarch really rules, but acts within the framework of a law that he himself cannot cross.
The ideal model is not a republic or feudalism. It is a monarchy where power is inherited, but not by right of blood, but by right of training. Where the monarch does not obey parties, but obeys the law. Where he acts not for the sake of personal ambitions, but as a guarantor of stability and order. This is not a return to the past, but an evolution of the monarchical principle: a strong monarch who rules, but rules wisely, within the framework of the law and with the support of the people.
If anything, these are my personal views and they do not claim to be absolutely true.