docs(linter): cleanup docs for multiple linter rules (oxc-project#11551)

Author: ulrichstark

crates/oxc_linter/src/rules/eslint/no_magic_numbers.rs

@@ -24,7 +24,6 @@ fn no_magic_number_diagnostic(span: Span, raw: &str) -> OxcDiagnostic {
 }
 
 #[derive(Debug, Default, Clone)]
-
 pub struct NoMagicNumbers(Box<NoMagicNumbersConfig>);
 
 impl std::ops::Deref for NoMagicNumbers {
@@ -66,7 +65,7 @@ impl TryFrom<&serde_json::Value> for NoMagicNumbersConfig {
         raw.get(0).map_or_else(
             || {
                 Err(OxcDiagnostic::warn(
-                    "Expecting object for typescript/no-magic-numbers configuration",
+                    "Expecting object for eslint/no-magic-numbers configuration",
                 ))
             },
             |object| {
@@ -116,7 +115,7 @@ impl TryFrom<&serde_json::Value> for NoMagicNumbersConfig {
 declare_oxc_lint!(
     /// ### What it does
     ///
-    /// The no-magic-numbers rule aims to make code more readable and refactoring easier by ensuring that special numbers are declared as constants to make their meaning explicit.
+    /// This rule aims to make code more readable and refactoring easier by ensuring that special numbers are declared as constants to make their meaning explicit.
     /// The current implementation does not support BigInt numbers inside array indexes.
     ///
     /// ### Why is this bad?
@@ -127,7 +126,6 @@ declare_oxc_lint!(
     ///
     /// Examples of **incorrect** code for this rule:
     /// ```javascript
-    ///
     /// var dutyFreePrice = 100;
     /// var finalPrice = dutyFreePrice + (dutyFreePrice * 0.25);
     /// ```

crates/oxc_linter/src/rules/eslint/no_negated_condition.rs

@@ -31,7 +31,6 @@ declare_oxc_lint!(
     ///
     /// Examples of **incorrect** code for this rule:
     /// ```javascript
-    ///
     /// if (!a) {
     /// 	doSomethingC();
     /// } else {

crates/oxc_linter/src/rules/eslint/no_undefined.rs

@@ -19,10 +19,13 @@ declare_oxc_lint!(
     ///
     /// ### Why is this bad?
     ///
+    /// Using undefined directly can lead to bugs, since it can be shadowed or overwritten in JavaScript.
+    /// It's safer and more intentional to use null or rely on implicit undefined (e.g., missing return) to avoid accidental issues.
     ///
-    /// ### Example of bad code
-    /// ```javascript
+    /// ### Examples
     ///
+    /// Examples of **incorrect** code for this rule:
+    /// ```javascript
     /// var foo = undefined;
     ///
     /// var undefined = "foo";
@@ -38,7 +41,7 @@ declare_oxc_lint!(
     /// bar(undefined, "lorem");
     /// ```
     ///
-    /// ### Example of good code
+    /// Examples of **correct** code for this rule:
     /// ```javascript
     /// var foo = void 0;
     ///

crates/oxc_linter/src/rules/eslint/valid_typeof.rs

@@ -56,7 +56,7 @@ declare_oxc_lint!(
     /// typeof bar == "undefined"
     /// typeof foo === baz
     /// typeof bar === typeof qux
-    /// ```js
+    /// ```
     ///
     /// ### Options
     ///