There is no "ideal body" (within this context).
Nonessential body is certainly not required if the question is self-explanatory and complete, but it often helps to make the matter more relatable, which, in turn, might make readers want to help solve a problem in the first place.
It shows the OP is willing to put effort into their question, which, apart from coming across as more sympathetic, can funnel the answers to be more appropriate.
Noting the things the OP tried to solve the problem, can help in that regard as well.
What you also see regularly, are edits by the OP that add additional information to clarify their specific situation later on (like here - note that this is not really a one-liner question).
In this case, without the additional information, the question should have been closed as being 'primarily opinion-based' or 'too broad' (which still is plausible), but the specification of the matter (apparently) warrants the leniency, arguably because now users see beyond another unsolved problem to a situation they feel they, too, have been in.
Of course, this should be done within reason.
It can backfire, as some questions have unnecessary filler, that doesn't help the situation at all. I'm thinking about unrelated anecdotes, introductions of OP's to how they picked up a game again, how their character is this or that, a reference to something external that is irrelevant, &c. (and oh! have I grown a dislike towards the interjectionary use of the word "so" (a statement which is, indeed, unnecessary filler)).
Then again, a short but entertaining anecdote - specific to the situation - can be a great way to keep users interested - after twenty review queue items, it can rekindle the love for games. Or reviewing. Or people. We're all doing this voluntarily, and, after all, all work and no play makes Jack a dull boy.
Concluding, I would say that the body of a post should focus on making the problem clearer, and/or more specific, and/or more entertaining.
