“This part drags” may capture your reaction, but it does not tell an editor what to examine. A useful edit note points to a location and explains the problem the proposed change is meant to solve. Start with one short passage rather than a judgment about the whole episode.
Separate observation and proposal
Record the timestamp and what happens there. For example, the speaker restates the question before answering it. Then describe your response: you found the repeated setup difficult to follow. Finally, propose checking whether the repetition can be shortened without changing the meaning.
The proposal is not automatically the right edit. It gives the editor a testable option and makes the reason for trying it clear.
Preserve context when reviewing
Listen to the candidate change with material before and after it. A cut that sounds tidy in isolation may remove a qualification or make a response seem more certain than it was. Check meaning as well as rhythm.
Keep a record of accepted decisions so later revisions do not reopen the same question without new evidence. The note should help people discuss the work, not turn a personal preference into an unexplained command. Clear reasoning makes disagreement easier to resolve.