A beer with the perceived bitterness as being too low for that style is not necessarily "flawed", but rather "not to style" (in accordance with the BJCP style guidelines) when sampled by that particular judge. Short statements like "increasing hop bitterness would bring this beer to style quidelines" would be adequate.
Flaws, on the other hand, may benefit from more descriptions and suggestions, even if they're obvious to the judge. Recently, I was asked to informally give feedback to a homebrewer within the club who is a good brewer but occasionally ferments his beers and meads too warm. Fusels just wrecked the beers and the mead. Had to keep giving the advice I've given before--"excessive amounts of fusels severely detract from the beer/mead. Pitch adequate amounts of yeast (use starters, for example). Control fermentation temperatures better. Ferment at cooler temps."
I agree there's not enough room on the sheet to write: "There's no way in hell you're gonna keep the beer or mead at 64 F in the bathtub or hall closet, in the house, in Summertime, in Florida, when your wife turns up the temp from 73 F to 79 F when you leave for work every morning, when the yeast are actively fermenting and raising the heat of the wort/beer even higher than ambient air temps...etc. etc. I'm gonna hate this headache tomorrow, and it's all because of your damn beer (or mead). Dude, you gotta get a fridge and a Ranco controller! Don't make another batch until you do!" But, sometimes I wish I could.
I think some individuals have to have the analysis spelled out for them (repeatedly, if necessary) rather than a cryptic short statement like "This beer has excessive levels of fusels."