Or just drop very? Those are all good descriptive words by themselves, and the alternatives aren't really guaranteed to not need modification with something like very.
Apart from that, there's honestly a lot that bugs me about it. For the most part though, these are all depending on the use case and would require you to have a relative mastery of english.
A couple are...
Simple and basic can generally be interchanged with each other. There are also times when very simple means something completely different from basic. (eg. chemistry)
As someone mentioned, "very perfect" wouldn't really be used in the implied sense. It would be more used to convey extreme fragility, in that destruction happens with the slightest problem.
Another one is that you can be very open about your thoughts/feelings, but you wouldn't necessarily announce them by being transparent.
Rich is having lots of money. Wealthy is having a lot of passive income. In practice, the 2 are similar. A rich person can invest, and so become wealthy. A wealthy person is often rich. It's possible to only be 1 however. E.g. Someone with a large property portfolio would be wealthy, but not necessarily rich.
This is one of the powers of the English language. We have a ridiculous number of pseudonyms. They have similar meanings, but vary subtly. This allows us to express ideas with a lot more granularity than a lot of other languages.
My headmaster once substituted one of my classes and used it to demonstrate how “get” is a really crap word and you can always replace it with a more descriptive and apt synonym.
Nowadays I just have to choke down when business people ask me to “action” things.
Not-that-fun fact, years ago way before any new taxi service, during the reign of a then-popular particular word, I heard someone refer to something as “super uber strong”. Apparently neither intensifier was enough on its own