This paper states the deterministic policy gradient theorem. The proof of the theorem is provided in a supplement. This question is about the very first step in the proof. It begins with
$$ \nabla_\theta V^{\mu_\theta}(s) = \nabla_\theta Q^{\mu_\theta}(s, \mu_\theta(s)) = \nabla_\theta \left( r(s, \mu_\theta(s)) + \int_{\mathcal{S}} \gamma p(s' | s, \mu_\theta(s)) V^{\mu_\theta} (s')ds' \right) $$
and then more steps follow. The first equality is clear. This follows from the relation between the state value function $V$ and the state-action value function $Q$. In the more general stochastic case, with a stochastic policy $\pi$ we have this relation: $$ V^\pi (s) = \sum_a \pi(a|s) Q^\pi(s, a). $$ When the policy $\pi$ is changed to $\mu_\theta $ and is deterministic, only 1 term in the sum remains and we get $$ V^{\mu_\theta}(s) = Q^{\mu_\theta}(s, \mu_\theta(s)) . $$
Now we apply $\nabla_\theta$ on each side. This is where the confusion starts. On the right side we can use the chain rule and we would get
$$ \nabla_\theta V^{\mu_\theta}(s) = \nabla_\theta Q^{\mu_\theta}(s, \mu_\theta(s)) = \nabla_\theta \mu_\theta(s) \nabla_a Q^{\mu_\theta}(s, a)|_{a=\mu_\theta(s)} $$ and be done. Doesn't this directly prove the theorem?
Surely I must have missed something. Can you please explain why this simple differentiation rule is not used in the proof and why the long substitution in the next step is needed, and where does that come from?
Also, it would be helpful to see what do the Bellman equations look like for a deterministic policy?
Many thanks