I recently took time to study triage items and as far as I could tell, the system can (or rather, should) be tweaked (with reasonably small development effort) to help inexperienced reviewers do more useful work.
I checked about 350 triage questions in the last 10 days (mostly using skip because I prefer to invest my close votes elsewhere) and what struck me the most was how few questions felt like they were in the need of "Requires Editing".
These were mostly cases with reasonably sensible text and glitches with code formatting. These really strongly felt like in the need in H&I review, however these were very very rare.
My guess is this is because most such cases are handled outside of review, by users who organically watch questions in their tags (these were probably originally planned to be hidden in tag pages but since this feature implementation was abandoned midway triaged questions are visible in tag pages, I just re-checked that).
For the sake of completeness, there was another (also rather infrequent) category of questions that I would prefer to pass to H&I, these that were overall okay but might be improved by removing greetings and salutations. But frankly, for these it somehow felt... tolerable even if they would be slipped through triage by skips and looks-ok votes - probably because these were mostly the questions that really looked okay otherwise.
In my studies however things changed when I figured that most reviewers will be likely less (much less) experienced than me. I tried to imagine how it would feel for a user who maybe hasn't even cast a close flag yet.
And that perspective changed things to basically opposite. I wrote above that "requires editing" was needed very rarely - forget about it: for an inexperienced reviewer it looks like the right way out in very very many cases.
Time and time again I made myself notes that particular review would look like "requires editing" for an inexperienced user even though someone like me would pick another option in a heartbeat.
It was like, everytime I made an effort to forget about my tens of thousands of close votes and imagine how it would look like for a newbie reviewer, it very very often ended in "hey, this looks like requires editing, isn't it".
Given what I learned above I think it would be better to disable Requires Editing until user completes 20 (better, 50) reviews. As I wrote above, this option is needed very rarely and system would better change to teach newbie reviewers use more frequently needed options before opening the one that they would (incorrectly) use instead.
Technically, this could be implemented by simply deleting or graying out "Requires Editing" button for users who didn't reach the required milestone. However I personally would prefer for it to stay enabled but (for non-audit reviews) pop-up a modal window explaining to reviewer why it is not available to them and when they are expected to get it enabled.