Well, In order to know whether your question has an easy answer, such as a syntax error, You'd have to already know the answer, and in that case, you probably wouldn't have been asking in the first place.
If your situation actually was against the rules, than It would be possible for the perfect rules lawyer with 100% knowledge of the rules to not know whether or not he was breaking the rules by asking his question.
for the benefit of @Robert Harvey
My logic is very similar to proof by Contradiction, albeit not 100% formal
Step 1: assume the opposite of what you're trying to prove
In this case we assume
It is against the Rules to post a question with a trivial answer
step 2. show that the assumption doesn't make sense
If that were the case, then even the Best of rules lawyers would need to know what the answer was in order to know whether their question was within the rules or not. Even if you have a perfect comprehension of the rules, That would not be enough unless you actually had knowledge of the answer
So If the most experienced SO user asked a question that he did not know the answer to, then he would not have the necessary information to determine whether the question violates
answer too simple rule.
A master rules lawyer should not be uncertain regarding whether an answer was against the rules, therefore
Answer can not be too simple Should not be a rule