ARMA model coefficient Interpretation
Regarding the AR part, in my view, them have a purely correlational interpretation only. Therefore them are transformation of total or partial linear correlation coefficients and maintain them interpretation too. In the case of $MA$ part a non observable series is involved (errors) and I'm not sure if the same interpretation hold. However remember that any stationary and invertible $ARMA$ have a pure $AR$ representation too.
For example, the phi in the $AR(1)$ model equals $0.3467$, can I interpret
it as that for every 1 unit increase in $X_{t-1}$, $X_t$ would increase by
$0.3467$?
This statement is usually affirmed for any regression. It can be literally correct but can be misleading too. The word "increase" is ambiguous, what it mean? It is an observed fact or imply some intervention?
If you intend an observed fact the interpretation is correct and it is purely correlational. If you have in mind an intervention the interpretation is surely wrong because $AR$ model are "free of theory" model, it avoid causal reasoning. This my question is related: Structural equation and causal model in economics