Answer

In the booklet Divrei Sofrim, he writes that there is, and his proof is from the midrash cited by Rashi on “The conversation of the servants of the patriarchs is more pleasing than the Torah of the sons.” We see that the midrash assumes that lengthiness in describing the event indicates its importance. However, several objections can be raised to this—for example, the prohibition “You shall not murder,” which is extremely brief, and it is not reasonable to say that it is therefore less important. It seems that the elaboration indicates the need to emphasize the importance, not the importance itself. In the case of murder, this is obvious and needs no elaboration.
But the proof itself from Divrei Sofrim does not seem compelling to me. It is aggadic midrash, and it should not be taken too seriously. From there he infers, like the Ran in Nedarim 8a, who wrote that an oath can take effect regarding a commandment that is not written explicitly in the Torah (but is rather derived through exposition). The fact that the Torah was brief apparently shows that it is less important. As stated, that is not necessary.