Does anyone have a Mathematica implementation of the standard $\arg\zeta(s)$ function required to evaluate $S(T)$?

Question

This question is related to my question Is there an elegant exact formula for the zeta zero counting function? on Math StackExchange.

---

Question: Does anyone have a Mathematica implementation of the standard $\arg\zeta(s)$ function required to evaluate the function $S(T)=\frac{\Im\left(\log\zeta\left(\frac{1}{2}+i\,T\right)\right)}{\pi}=\frac{\arg\zeta\left(\frac{1}{2}+i\,T\right)}{\pi}$?

---

I believe Mathematica truncates $\arg\zeta(s)$ to the interval $(-\pi,\pi)$ whereas evaluation of $S(T)$ requires an analytic continuation of $\arg\zeta(s)$.

---

The answer posted to my question on Math StackExchange implies the analytic continuation of $\arg\zeta(s)$ is derived from the analytic continuation of $\log\zeta(s)$ and the relationship $\arg\zeta(s)=\Im(\log\zeta(s))$. The reason I formulated this question in terms of $\arg\zeta(s)$ instead of $\log\zeta(s)$ is because Mathematica simplifies $\Im(\log\zeta(s))$ to $\arg\zeta(s)$ which initially led to me to believe $\Im(\log\zeta(s))$ is derived from $\arg\zeta(s)$.

---

The fact that Mathematica does not properly evaluate $\log\zeta(s)$ and $\arg\zeta(s)$ is a bit upsetting and disturbing to me. This also seems to imply Mathematica may not be properly evaluating many of the functions related to $\zeta(s)$ such as those listed at Zeta Functions & Polylogarithms. I've been evaluating many of these functions related to $\zeta(s)$ for about $4\frac{1}{2}$ years now and only recently became aware Mathematica is not evaluating all of these functions correctly.

---

Assuming the definitions of $N(T)$ and $N_0(T)$ in formulas (1) and (2) below, I've been told $N_0(T)=N(T)\,\forall\,T\ne\Im(\rho)$. This implies one can get a pretty good idea of what $\arg\zeta(s)$ looks like when evaluated along the critical line in the upper half-plane by evaluating formula (3) below.

---

(1) $\quad N(T)=\sum\limits_{0<\Im(\rho)\le T} 1$

(2) $\quad N_0(T)=1+\frac{\vartheta(T)}{\pi}+\frac{\arg\left(\zeta\left(\frac12+i\,T\right)\right)}{\pi})$

$\qquad\qquad\quad\ =1+\frac{\vartheta(T)}{\pi}+\frac{\Im\left(\log\zeta\left(\frac12+i\,T\right)\right)}{\pi}$

(3) $\quad\arg\zeta\left(\frac{1}{2}+i\,T\right)=\pi\left(N(T)-\left(\frac{\vartheta(T)}{\pi}+1\right)\right),\quad T\ge 0\land T\ne\Im(\rho)$

---

Figure (1) below illustrates the Mathematica evaluation of $\text{Arg[Zeta[1/2+I T]}$ in orange overlaid on formula (3) for $\arg\zeta\left(\frac{1}{2}+i\,T\right)$ in blue in the interval $0<T<52$. The two dashed horizontal reference lines are at $\pm \pi$. Note the two evaluations are pretty much exactly the same in this interval except where $T=\Im(\rho)$ which I believe is because Mathematica does not truncate $\arg\zeta\left(\frac{1}{2}+i\,T\right)$ in this interval.

---

Figure (1): Mathematica evaluation of $\text{Arg[Zeta[1/2+I T]}$ (orange) overlaid on formula (3) for $\arg\zeta\left(\frac{1}{2}+i\,T\right)$ (blue)

---

Figure (2) below illustrates the Mathematica evaluation of $\text{Arg[Zeta[1/2+I T]}$ in orange overlaid on formula (3) for $\arg\zeta\left(\frac{1}{2}+i\,T\right)$ in blue near Gram point $g_{126}$ and $\Im\left(\rho_{127}\right)$ where Gram's law is violated. The two dashed horizontal reference lines are at $\pm \pi$. Note Mathematica truncates $\arg\zeta\left(\frac{1}{2}+i\,T\right)$ to the interval $(-\pi,\pi)$ which is apparently inconsistent with the analytic continuation of $\log\zeta(s)$ and $\arg\zeta(s)=\Im(\log\zeta(s))$. The orange and red dots represent the discrete evaluation points $(g_{126},\text{Arg[Zeta[1/2+I $g_{126}$])}$ and $\left(\Im\left(\rho_{127}\right),\arg\zeta\left(\frac{1}{2}+i\,\Im\left(\rho_{127}\right)\right)\right)$ respectively.

---

Figure (2): Mathematica evaluation of $\text{Arg[Zeta[1/2+I T]}$ (orange) overlaid on formula (3) for $\arg\zeta\left(\frac{1}{2}+i\,T\right)$ (blue)

---

Figure (3) below illustrates the Mathematica evaluation of $\text{Arg[Zeta[1/2+I T]}$ in orange overlaid on formula (3) for $\arg\zeta\left(\frac{1}{2}+i\,T\right)$ in blue near Gram point $g_{6707}$, $\Im(\rho_{6709})$, and $\Im(\rho_{6710})$ where Lehmer's Phenomenon is exhibited. The two dashed horizontal reference lines are at $\pm \pi$. Note Mathematica once again truncates $\arg\zeta\left(\frac{1}{2}+i\,T\right)$ to the interval $(-\pi,\pi)$. The orange dot represents the discrete evaluation point $(g_{6707},\text{Arg[Zeta[1/2+I $g_{6707}$])}$ and the two red dots represent the evaluation points $\left(\Im\left(\rho_{6709}\right),\arg\zeta\left(\frac{1}{2}+i\,\Im\left(\rho_{6709}\right)\right)\right)$ and $\left(\Im\left(\rho_{6710}\right),\arg\zeta\left(\frac{1}{2}+i\,\Im\left(\rho_{6710}\right)\right)\right)$.

---

Figure (3): Mathematica evaluation of $\text{Arg[Zeta[1/2+I T]}$ (orange) overlaid on formula (3) for $\arg\zeta\left(\frac{1}{2}+i\,T\right)$ (blue)