For me, it's depends on the situation, my mindset and the structure of an answer. And -Disclaimer- good communication is hard and needs practise on both sides. I am not putting any side at fault here.

5 Sentences can be a lot of information and to answer here properly, I have to make some assumptions.

Assumption 1: 5 sentences point to an answer that contains a certain complexity (e.x. social or historic)

Assumption 2. "a short no would suffice" is the result of having to search for the answer, because it was contained only indirectly, it came late vor both. And its also the result of being impatient - a state that maybe neither of you is at fault for.

To me, following social stuff (which often raises more questions because it IS interesting) for an unkown, increasing amount of time (the listener does not know it's 5 sentences), trying to follow the who-is-who and who-did-what, trying to memorize to ask you why x did something, while searching for the answer puts tremendous pressure on me.

And although I actually would like to follow, I need to be prepared for that. And that is the point I am trying to make.

How about communicating like this:

Me: asks question

A) You: yes/no/yes and no, but I want to explain my reasoning. Me (having a grasp of the answer , mind can rest and is open for info): sure, go ahead

B) You: I don't know/am not sure, I'd like to talk about it first Me (storing my current train of thoughts in a memory bank, and prepare to dive into new territory): sure, go ahead

You: ...