Direct copying has no way to explain why the order of the brothers should be shifted (what purpose would that serve?). This is a sign of an oral common tradition, along with the other variants; it makes sense as a common oral Aramaic version that Peter did less well in Greek than Matthew, rather than seeing Matthew getting frustrated constantly correcting his Markan source. It also makes sense of a different word being used ("amazed" vs "astounded") as each was able to choose a Greek word for an Aramaic one independently.

Neville [325] notes an argument that Mark's "carpenter" vs Matthew's "son of a carpenter" seems to lessen an insult in Mark, that being called a "son of" a mother (not a father) can be seen as insulting. But Matthew does not erase other insults (11:19, 12:24) and it is just as arguable that Mark changed Matthew because it would be misleading to use "son of a carpenter" where he lacked a virgin birth account. The point being, that such arguments depending on presupposed Christology or theology are ultimately inconclusive.

This one is a classic for Marcan prioritists as they assume Matthew is hiding Jesus' inability to do miracles; but they are in error about who it is who is "unable" (see here) so the key argument for Marcan priority here fails. Rather, Mark's addition of the infirm ones is a personal eyewitness testimony corresponding with those works Matthew does indicate, and Matthew's cause is the same as Mark's.

Ur-Matthew Reconstruction

And coming into the fatherland of-him taught them in the synagogue of-them so that were-astounded they even to-say From-where this-one the wisdom this and the works of power? Not this is the of carpenter son? Not the mother of-him called Miriam and the brothers of-him James and Joseph and Simon and Judas? And the sisters of-him not all with us are? And they-were-offended in-him. the But Jesus said to-them Not is prophet honorless except in the fatherland of-him and in the house of-him. And not he-did there works-of-power many because of unbelief of-them.