In the path integral picture of quantum field theory we can define the theory with the generating functional which, leaving aside all of the unsolved mathematical problems in actually constructing it, is given by $$ Z[J] = \frac{1}{\mathcal{N}}\int \mathcal{D}\phi e^{i S[\phi] + i J \phi}.$$ Now the integration is over all field configurations; not just ones that satisfy the equations of motion. The stationary phase approximation tells us that the leading order behavior (in $\hbar$ I believe) will be the classical equations of motion. I believe the non-classical/non-stationary effects can be quantified in the Schwinger-Dyson differential equation.
Okay, so imagine defining a new action $$ \overline{S}[\phi] =S[\phi] + T[\phi] $$ Where $T[\phi]$ is a term which vanishes when $\phi$ satisfies the classical equation of motion e.g. is a solution to $\frac{\delta S}{\delta \phi}[\phi] = 0$. This would seem to lead to a theory that is quantum mechanically different, but classically the same. I don't think that this is the same thing as a quantum anomaly because there it is that the measure $\mathcal{D}\phi$ is not symmetric under the same symmetries as the classical theory.
Here are my questions:
It certainly seems that $\overline{S}$ could lead to different predictions than $S$ (with $T$ chosen appropriately). Is this the case? If so, what is a specific example of two theories that are equivalent classically but not quantum mechanically?
How does this connect to the operator view of Quantum field theory? I know that there is an operator ordering ambiguity in defining the Hamiltonian in this approach, and this manifests subtly in how we construct the path integral (I remember reading about this somewhere in Quantization of Gauge Systems by Henneaux and Teitolbom). Is this fundamentally the same ambiguity?