The best questions on this site include not only a clear description of the problem, but also a description of where the person asking the question encountered the problem and what they have already tried to solve it. That is the standard that we should encourage for all questions.
So the following fake question is already poorly composed, although it is at least clear enough that we can try to answer it:
How do I integrate $\int \sin(x)\,dx$?
That question is poorly written because it lacks all context about why the person wants to integrate this, and what sort of integration they could do. It demonstrates essentially the least possible effort for the questioner to state the problem. When I have the energy, I leave comments on these sorts of questions to let the asker know that we wish they would provide more information.
On the other hand, if we remove the words to yield the "question"
then, in my mind, we do not even have a genuine question left. I think that, in such a situation, we should leave a comment explaining that a formula on its own is not a question. But I would also vote to close a question of that form, because I don't see it as a question in the first place. It demonstrates less than the least effort needed to write a precise question.
Personally, I don't give much weight to the fact that we may be able to guess several possible questions from a formula. If we would like to see more well-written questions, we should be clear with question askers that this is not a site for hurried, poorly-written ones. The main way to do this is with comments that clearly explain our expectations... if the problem we are dealing with is that the asker did not use enough words to communicate their intentions, we should not make the same mistake.