My advice on how Very Low Quality flags are assessed is in my answer to your earlier question of Why is " Very Low Quality" on this question declined?:
The way I assess Very Low Quality flags is to see whether:
- the poster has attempted to answer or ask a question and just done so poorly. If so, I think this is a low quality post and should be
addressed using a comment, edit and/or downvote. I decline such
- the poster has not attempted to answer or ask a question and has instead posted something akin to jibberish. This is Very Low Quality
and I mark such flags as Helpful.
That answer was endorsed in comments on it by two other moderators.
Your question here is about a slightly different case of an answer which is not much more than link-only by a new user. However, exactly the same two criteria are used to assess the flag you are asking about here as a Very Low Quality answer.
To understand more why I think such answers are not Very Low Quality, see the answers to Should all link-only answers be considered very low quality?. In particular:
They are low-quality, they just don't always meet the criteria for the
Very Low Quality flag.
Link-only answers can lead you to information that answers the
question ... If you're not willing to downvote an answer, you
shouldn't flag it as NAA or VLQ. Those flags are cues to moderators to
remove an answer. If the link isn't broken already, just downvote and
leave a comment.
The reason why we want you to comment is that flagging is getting us
Flagging does not provide feedback to the user that there's a problem
with their answer. At best, their answer gets deleted and they raise a
meta question. At worst, they don't notice and so they keep doing it.
Communicating with the user let's them know this behavior is not
encouraged, and more importantly, tells them how to improve. That's
what's going to improve the site.
Link-only answers can be improved, and all users with comment, editing and downvoting privileges can do much to assist in that effort without flagging.