(This is not only a response to this particular comment but also a general rant about such comments)
What is the point of this kind of comment? You can summarize an X page book in X/10 words. So what? Would that summary get the book's message out effectively to people?
A 200 page book (about anything, I don't mean about checklists) written entirely in the style of your summary would be unreadable. Or it would be some kind of reference, like man pages, usually not something people read with pleasure, and not something to introduce you to a topic. The less a book invites "This could be X pages"-type criticisms, the more unreadable it is.
Aside from that, I found the memorable thing about the book to be the stories of how surprisingly effective checklists are, what a difference they can make, and how and why things have gone wrong without them. All that stuff you would cut as superfluous.
Non-fiction books, like (e.g. C or Python) functions, don't have to be "great"; it's enough if they do one thing and do it well. The book did that, and very memorably.
And maybe someone will read between the lines and learn or see something else about the world or people or our systems from the book. I find such criticisms mistakenly assume only one thing can be gotten from a book, and their summary presents that. In university courses, a lot of the benefit comes not from the content but seeing an expert in action, how they think, how they talk, what it looks like to be a professional in that subject.
I am often reminded, by the frequent criticisms that speakers should speak faster, books/blog posts should be shorter, people AskingHN how to learn music as fast as possible etc, of this Zen parable:
A young but earnest Zen student approached his teacher, and asked the Zen Master:
“If I work very hard and diligent how long will it take for me to find Zen ?”
The Master thought about this, then replied, “Ten years.”
The student then said, “But what if I work very, very hard and really apply myself to learn fast — How long then ?”
Replied the Master, “Well, twenty years.”
“But, if I really, really work at it. How long then ?” asked the student. “Thirty years,” replied the Master.
“But, I do not understand,” said the disappointed student.
“At each time that I say I will work harder, you say it will take me longer.
Why do you say that ?”
Replied the Master, “When you have one eye on the goal, you only have one eye on the path.”
It is also reminiscent of "efficiency" in modern economics, where we are worried about systems being as efficient as possible—to get where we are going sooner—but where we are actually going, is not discussed.
You could summarize this comment in 5 words, but you would lose the unforgettable, epic journey this comment has taken you on.