YMMV, of course, but most adventures are go to location X and kill stuff. I'd guess the vast majority of every quest is that in DnD history.
The gnome area is great for role play. You have to convince a dude to leave an area, even after you clear it out in another quest. Falcon's lodge? Umbrage hill, where you need to talk to someone after possibly scaring something off? The ratio seems about right to me, plus I'd guess most DMs have some roleplay in town, but maybe that's just me and my friends?
Plus, and this is key, most of the areas are playable in a session or two, and easily stolen (and, frankly, easy to modify if you want).
I agree on exploration, but there are almost NO good examples of that pillar in any adventure from WotC. Huge weakness, imo.
Gnomengard is very good, but it's an exception - there's nothing else like that in the book.
Umbrage Hill is an outrageously bad first encounter for new players, and it's absolutely the one they're likely to do first.
Falcon's lodge meh. They could have taken half a page and tied Falcon in to an old adventuring party that included the wizard that owned the Woodland Lodge and the lady buried in Dragon Mound and done some kind of cool redemption or tragic mystery story there, but instead it's just a generic Aragorn clone who lives in the woods and you can give him a bottle of wine.
I agree that the fact that the missions are bite-sized and can be completed in a session or two is a plus. But they could still be a lot more thoughtful and interesting and varied than they are.