Should players recount their moves during deliberation in Werewolf? What if no werewolves?
There is a benefit to a villager holding back information, or telling a lie. The benefit is that if all the villagers immediately and automatically tell the truth, then the werewolf can use the information to his advantage. For example, if no villager claims to be the Seer, then the werewolf can safely say that he was the seer. If, however, people are reluctant to claim things, then if the werewolf claims to be the Seer, then the real Seer can speak up and call out his lie.

Another thing I've seen done is the troublemaker telling a lie about which players he switched. For example, I'm the troublemaker, and I switched players A and B with each other. I suspect that player C is the werewolf. I say "I switched players A and C". Player C, who really was the werewolf, believes me, and says "well in that case, I was the werewolf to start, so now player A must be the werewolf!" Then, when I reveal the truth that player C is was NOT actually switched, we all know that player C is the wolf, he just admitted it!

It is also not clear from your description what a werewolf does in your games. If "everyone tells the truth", and everyone is believable, then what does the werewolf do? If someone says that he was a Village Idiot, how do you know if he's telling the truth, or if he is actually a werewolf who is lying?

If there is no werewolf, then the villagers win by not killing anyone. The only way to do this is to not give more than 1 vote to any player (for example, each player votes for the person on his/her right). Often players will agree to vote this way if they are truly convinced that no one is a werewolf; but if they do so, and there actually was a werewolf, then the werewolf wins.

So yes, it is normal to discuss what each person did, and who each person is. But the werewolf will almost always be lying, which means that you can't know for sure if any 1 person is telling the truth or not.