Rule 41 was specifically adopted at TDA Summit 2013 in response to a new "betting fad" of tossing out tiny chips when facing a much larger prior bet. The Association wanted to nip this trend in the bud so to speak before it got so out of hand that we lost all betting discipline and it somehow became okay to toss out any size chip for any occasion.
The illustration in the OP is a bit different in that the tiny chip is tossed out silently as an opener when facing no prior bet.
Personally I would never allow a player to clarify his action here. If so, that would give him the option to toss out a tiny chip, gauge the table reaction and then determine what his betting action is going to be... anywhere from 400 to all-in in this case. Rather I would rule this a min-bet and call it 400 to the next player. Let's say instead he had tossed out two 100's, then we would have 50% of the min bet of 400 and there would be no doubt we'd rule that a 400 opener using the 50% standard in Rule 43. Why we would allow him to toss out one less chip and call it all in makes no sense and gives him an undeserved range of betting options.
There's another way to interpret this action: 1) That player is "signalling his intent to bet" by putting out any chip(s). Therefore we're going to hold him to a bet. 2) If he puts out a mistaken amount then we use the betting guidelines to come up with the most appropriate amount, and this is done by TD determination, not by player clarification. 3) There is a general guideline in TDA that unclear bets will be ruled "the lesser of", also 4) The least damaging for the game is to not let betting discipline get out of control where "any chip can mean any bet"... just rule it a min bet, caution the player, and move on.