Drying time after a VPI record cleaner?

Leaving them out for room drying will result in more debris on the clean record in my estimation. The VPI, once you get the wand angle right, should dry them- i like the idea above, about the lift (assuming the vacuum isn't so strong that it pulls the record when you lift). The problem, as wand machine users know, is that over-vacuuming can cause static. I also like to do a rinse step, and use a "two wand" approach for that, which means you have to buy another wand and another mounting pillar from VPI. My 16.5 started life as a 16 and still works! (I have other machines, but can and still use the VPI on occasion). Keep your wand pads clean, clean your applicators scrupulously. 
The air compressor- you don't mean canned air, right, but a real compressor? Presumably, with appropriate oil and particulate filters? I have various compressors that I have used for the system, but use a Rocket Blaster- bulb duster thingie that you can buy for 10 or 12 bucks on line- the large size--to get rid of loose surface detritus before cleaning. Another tip- if the record is nasty dirty, don't go scrubbing on the first cleaning pass. Wash lightly without a lot of scrubbing or strong agitation, vacuum, clean the vacuum lips, and then if you are of the agitation/scrubbing school- do that, to avoid grinding the surface stuff into the record in the process of cleaning it. 

Toothbrush is fine. I also use a solution of very pure alcohol and lab water to clean all the brushes and applicators, and rinse with lab water after a cleaning session, but if it is a nasty record, i have other brushes set aside for those, that will not be reused until fully cleaned. 

One telltale may be how water behaves on a record surface after it has been cleaned and dried. I suppose if you had access to a lab that could identify chemicals traces in suspension, you could measure the "pure water" first to get a baseline reading, then put a little such pure water on records that have been cleaned by different methods (rinse v no rinse), let it soak a bit, then draw it off and measure what’s in the water. Someone with scientific experience or training in chemistry could probably suggest a better, more accurate way. Have not researched what such lab tests would cost, or whether it is common for industry or bio-tech facilities to have such devices and how accurate such testing would be. If there is a scientist who knows, perhaps they can share their thoughts?
My non-scientific answer is that I don’t want to leave chemical residue on the record and to the extent a couple spins on a conventional vacuum RCM dries but does not entirely remove such residue, the rinse step gives you another shot at that.
My impression of "one steps" is that they are either for convenience or for use in machines that have reservoirs that apply fluid (which is also really about convenience).
I suspect that a lot of the current cleaning fluids aren’t chemical heavy anyway, and are mostly pure water with some surfactant to break surface tension and some mild detergent effect, perhaps with the addition of alcohol (which is often identified as an option by companies like AIVS).
The only thought I have about the ’who cares- i can’t hear it’ is this: if you are young enough, and stay with the medium, your system will likely improve; the second consideration is long term preservation and the possible effect of leaving vestiges of chemical in poly-type sleeves. Is cleaning one of the reasons people experience bag rash, i.e. an interaction between material on the record and the non-paper inner liner? Vinyl records seemed to endure pretty well as a stable medium without cleaning or fancy inners, leaving aside user abuse, kludgey tonearms/"needles" or low grade cleaning sprays or wipes offered in the past. The US Library of Congress has in its archival practices suggested that a rinse step is advisable. I certainly see no harm in it. On the other hand:
-the purity of the water in the "one step" may be higher than the purity of the "rinse water" so there may be a tradeoff: some minute traces of chemical residue v mineral or organic stuff left by the rinse water- which one is worse?
I recently pulled a record out I hadn’t listened to in decades, and judging by the inner-- an old Discwasher VRP--it was probably cleaned on my VPI back in the ’80s, with who knows what fluid. The record looked and played great, and I didn’t re-clean it using all of my current fancy cleaning gear.