chore: fix grammar mistakes in code comments

[myetcd]

Overview

fix grammar mistakes in code comments

Summary by CodeRabbit

• Documentation
  • Clarified the description of how the number of data availability blocks relates to an epoch.
  • Corrected wording in a test comment. These updates do not change application behavior.

[coderabbitai]

Navigate logical layers of code changes, visualize relationships, and explore their blast radius.

No actionable comments were generated in the recent review. 🎉

ℹ️ Recent review info

⚙️ Run configuration

Configuration used: defaults

Review profile: CHILL

Plan: Advanced

Run ID: cea82aaa-c50d-4b73-9ac9-3872371b5941

📥 Commits

Reviewing files that changed from the base of the PR and between b3ce5e4 and 8cec2c2.

📒 Files selected for processing (2)

• pkg/genesis/genesis.go
• types/signed_header_test.go

Included review availability: This review used your included allowance. Your plan provides up to 2 included reviews per hour; 1 remain after this review.

---

📝 Walkthrough

Walkthrough

Two comments were revised. The genesis comment clarifies the meaning of DAEpochForcedInclusion. The non-adjacency test comment corrects its possessive wording. Runtime behavior and test logic are unchanged.

Changes

Comment clarifications

Layer / File(s)	Summary
Corrected comments pkg/genesis/genesis.go, types/signed_header_test.go	The genesis comment describes the number of DA blocks making up an epoch. The test comment corrects “it’s” to “its.”

Priority: ⬇️ Low

Estimated code review effort: 1 (Trivial) | ~2 minutes

Change: Other

Merge Risk: ⚪ Minimal · up to 8cec2

Both edits are comment-only, and the clarified epoch description matches how epoch size is used. No merge-blocking risk is indicated.

🚥 Pre-merge checks | ✅ 3 | ❌ 2

❌ Failed checks (2 warnings)

Check name	Status	Explanation	Resolution
Description check	⚠️ Warning	The description identifies the general change but does not provide the required context, background, goal, or rationale in the Overview section.	Expand the Overview section with a concise explanation of the affected comments, the reason for correcting them, and the intended outcome. Include an issue reference if one exists.
Docstring Coverage	⚠️ Warning	Docstring coverage is 0.00% which is insufficient. The required threshold is 80.00%. Docstring coverage is scoped to functions touched by this diff. Analyzed 1 functions across 2 files.	Write docstrings for the functions missing them to satisfy the coverage threshold.

✅ Passed checks (3 passed)

Check name	Status	Explanation
Title check	✅ Passed	The title clearly summarizes the two comment-only grammar fixes and uses the conventional commit format.
Linked Issues check	✅ Passed	Check skipped because no linked issues were found for this pull request.
Out of Scope Changes check	✅ Passed	Check skipped because no linked issues were found for this pull request.

• Fix all pre-merge checks with AI

✨ Finishing Touches

🧪 Generate unit tests (beta)

• Create a new PR

---

Thanks for using CodeRabbit! It's free for OSS, and your support helps us grow. If you like it, consider giving us a shout-out.

❤️ Share

• X
• Mastodon
• Reddit
• LinkedIn

_{Comment @coderabbitai help to get the list of available commands.}