feat(staking): add stake calculation page #1961
Conversation
|
Skipping AI review because this PR is from a fork. A maintainer can start the review by commenting /review in this PR. |
|
/review |
![github-actions[bot]](https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/in/15368?s=60&v=4){kind=small}
| --- | ||
| title: "Stake calculation" | ||
| sidebarTitle: "Stake calculation" | ||
| description: "How MyTonCtrl computes the stake amount for each election round, including inputs, priority rules, safety reserves, and network limit guards." | ||
| --- |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
[HIGH] Description uses how‑to style marketing framing
The frontmatter description line (L4) uses the phrase “How MyTonCtrl computes the stake amount for each election round, including inputs, priority rules, safety reserves, and network limit guards.” This “How …” construction reads like a how‑to or marketing headline rather than a neutral summary, which conflicts with the style rule banning marketing‑style or promotional language in technical content. The page itself is structured as an explanation/reference of stake calculation rules, so the description should use neutral, factual phrasing that matches the doc type. See the style rule on marketing and promotional language for examples of neutral alternatives (https://github.com/ton-org/docs/blob/main/contribute/style-guide-extended.mdx?plain=1#L180-L196).
| --- | |
| title: "Stake calculation" | |
| sidebarTitle: "Stake calculation" | |
| description: "How MyTonCtrl computes the stake amount for each election round, including inputs, priority rules, safety reserves, and network limit guards." | |
| --- | |
| --- | |
| title: "Stake calculation" | |
| sidebarTitle: "Stake calculation" | |
| description: "Stake calculation rules in MyTonCtrl, including inputs, priority order, safety reserves, and network stake limits." | |
| --- |
Please leave a reaction 👍/👎 to this suggestion to improve future reviews for everyone!
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I'd argue that the description itself is redundant regardless of its contents — we try to avoid it on most pages and describe things in plain text instead. Alas, there are scarce descriptions out in the docs, but they are mostly historical baggage that will be removed in the future.
| ## Priority cascade | ||
|
|
||
| MyTonCtrl evaluates stake sources in a fixed priority order. The first rule that produces a value wins; later rules are skipped. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
[HIGH] Priority cascade heading not clearly procedural
The section heading ## Priority cascade introduces content that describes an ordered procedure MyTonCtrl follows to compute stake, but the heading itself is a short noun phrase that does not clearly signal behavior or a task. For procedure sections, the style guide prefers imperative or behavior-focused headings instead of bare concepts, to help readers quickly identify what the system does or what happens in that section. Using a more explicit, action-oriented heading improves scannability in the page and table of contents.
| ## Priority cascade | |
| MyTonCtrl evaluates stake sources in a fixed priority order. The first rule that produces a value wins; later rules are skipped. | |
| ## How the priority cascade works | |
| MyTonCtrl evaluates stake sources in a fixed priority order. The first rule that produces a value wins; later rules are skipped. |
Please leave a reaction 👍/👎 to this suggestion to improve future reviews for everyone!
2 participants
resolves #1960