Why was this question closed without even allowing the OP much time to clarify their question? Seems a bit harsh, as the question is fairly specific although it does need some extra details.
While not every question needs to meet the "perfect" criteria, it is reasonable to expect askers to at least provide the minimum about of information to remove ambiguity, provide context, and ensure they at least try to make it worthy of being answered.
John closed the question for pretty succinct reasons:
It's difficult to tell what is being asked here. This question is ambiguous, vague, incomplete, overly broad, or rhetorical and cannot be reasonably answered in its current form.
I am all for giving feedback to good questions that are slightly off-topic.
However, in that particular case, I think the OP didn't put even a modicum of effort into their question. It's not like we closed a question that was a brilliant 500-word essay explaining a problem in amazing detail.
So as John noted in a comment here, the boilerplate close reason should suffice when the question is a short, low-effort one. Part of the contract here is that askers should meet answers halfway. Heck, even a quarter of the way.. just put in some effort to ask good, clear questions -- how can anyone in good conscience expect effort in the answers if they have shown little to no effort in ask their question?