“Concise” isn’t good enough. If other scientists are trying to read through the tea leaves at what you’re trying to say you did, that defeats the entire point of a paper. The purpose of science is to create knowledge that other people can use and if people can’t replicate your work that’s not science.
I think the point is you don't have to give a complete BOM that includes where you got the power cables. Each scientist has to decide what amount of information needs to be conveyed. Of course this can be abused, or done sloppily, like anything else.
A place where you can spread out more is in dissertations. Mine contained an entire chapter on the experiment, another on the analysis, and appendices full of source code, schematics, etc. I happily sent out copies, at my expense. My setup was replicated roughly 3 times.
Yes, maybe there should be a process where peer scientists review a paper before it’s published, to make sure it is written clearly enough for other scientists to understand it.
