The review queue for late answers and first posts has the option "No action needed". Its description says that I should use it if no action is needed from me. This specific description confused me because there are posts in which I do not understand most of what is written, yet cannot find significant faults in them. As far as I am concerned, such a post could be of good quality, or it could be a bunch of gibberish with enough recognizable technical terms to fool a non-expert in the field. In either case, this post requires no action from me, as I cannot easily tell its quality.
In view of the above, here is my question. Should I interpret the "No action needed" option as meaning no action needed from me, as stated in its description? Or should I instead interpret it as: no action is needed from me and I mostly understand what is written? In the latter case, someone who cannot find anything wrong with the post, yet does not really follow it, should just click "Skip". Finally, here is a related question: do we have the capacity or permission to change the description of the button "No action needed"?
I have been mostly skipping questions and answers which I cannot understand to a significant extent, yet look good to me. However, I thought it might be a good idea to explicitly settle this confusion with a discussion on meta. I would also be glad to learn of other finer points of the review system which people think are similar to the above.