The pSCAN algorithm is widely acknowledged for its efficiency in structural graph clustering across diverse graph applications, frequently utilized to detect significant clusters within graphs. The results of pSCAN are constrained by two parameters: (1) the structural similarity constraint ϵ; (2) the density constraint μ. Nevertheless, determining appropriate values for these parameters proves challenging as users often lack the requisite professional knowledge. Consequently, users may inquire about the inclusion of unexpected vertices in specified clusters, posing why questions. In this paper, we aim to address these inquiries by investigating the challenge of answering why questions on structural graph clustering. The objective is to refine the initialized clustering parameters to exclude unexpected vertices from specified clusters. Initially, we introduce the crucial concept of label-vertices and delve into a unified explanation framework designed for addressing why questions on structural graph clustering. Subsequently, we propose two effective refining algorithms, namely FReEPS and FReMU, specifically tailored to modify the similarity constraint ϵ and the density constraint μ independently. Moreover, in our approach to enhancing efficiency, we introduce two baseline explanation algorithms, ReParFirstMUand ReParFirstEPS, simultaneously refining the parameters ϵ and μ to exclude unexpected vertices from specified clusters. Additionally, we explore two improved algorithms, FReParFirstMUand FReParFirstEPS, incorporating a process of pruning unnecessary parameter combinations and computations. This enhancement aims to improve the efficiency of simultaneously refining the two parameters for addressing these questions. Finally, we conducted comprehensive experiments on real social network datasets. The results illustrate that the explanation efficiency of FReEPS and FReMU surpasses that of the state-of-the-art explanation algorithms by 1-2 orders of magnitude. Moreover, FReMu exhibits faster performance than FReEPS. Furthermore, simultaneous refinement of the parameters ϵ and μ yields better-refined parameters. Additionally, FReParFirstMU and FReParFirstEPS outperform ReParFirstMU and ReParFirstEPS, respectively.