I need some clarification on reviewing First/Low Quality Posts.

I encountered (and failed) [this audit][1] which is basically the answer "Use a physical keyboard" to the question "How do I boot a laptop with a non-working keyboard?"  The answer is short, but in my opinion otherwise factually correct/helpful.

Is this answer's length the issue? Do we not want one-line answers that would otherwise solve the OP's problem/question? To that point I could see commenting to encourage the poster to add an explanation *why* this solution would work, but that wouldn't have materially changed the answer's general approach to the problem.

I frequently refer to [this Meta answer][2] when reviewing First Posts. I had used its checklist for common reasons to Flag/Delete when considering this audit's answer:

 - Is the post a link only answer?  **No**
 - Check for the instance of code if they provide a link.  **n/a**
 - Is the person asking a new question?  **No**
 - Is the poster answering the question?  **Yes**
 - Not relating to the question  **It's related**
 - Someone sending a "thanks" to another user  **No**
 - The original user posting the answer as the exact copy of someone else's answer (similar to a thanks)  **No**

Meta also has a [Low Quality posts guideline answer][4] that doesn't provide clear guidance on dealing with short, non link-only answers.  It does however suggest that for

> Wrong and unhelpful answers: If you can fix it without making an intrusive edit, do so. Otherwise, leave a comment explaning [sic] what’s wrong and possibly downvote. If there is no other problem, choose Looks OK.

I'm not complaining about failing the audit, but without understanding why I failed it I will likely do so again *and* fail to support the community's wishes for handling short but otherwise helpful answers.

  [1]: https://superuser.com/review/first-posts/382819
  [2]: http://meta.stackexchange.com/a/180030/271445
  [3]: http://meta.stackexchange.com/a/180029/271445
  [4]: http://meta.stackexchange.com/a/180029/271445