fix: next section is actually previous section

[sgwrangler]

Little confusion in the docs

next section

should be

previous section

Summary by CodeRabbit

• Documentation
  • Corrected a cross-reference in the Defining Columns section to point to the previous section, improving navigation accuracy.
  • Clarified guidance around using the same data type across examples, reinforcing consistency without changing meaning.
  • No functional changes; this update improves clarity and reduces potential confusion in the tables guide.

[coderabbitai[bot]]

Walkthrough

Doc update in docs/guide/tables.md: adjusted wording in “Defining Columns” to reference the Column Def Guide as “the previous section” instead of “the next section.” No code or API changes.

Changes

Cohort / File(s)	Summary
Docs docs/guide/tables.md	Updated phrasing in Defining Columns to point to the Column Def Guide as the previous section; content otherwise unchanged.

Estimated code review effort

🎯 1 (Trivial) | ⏱️ ~2 minutes

Poem

I nibbled the docs with a tidy hop,
Flipped “next” to “previous” with a gentle bop.
No code was stirred, no tests to run—
Just breadcrumbs aligned under documentation sun.
Thump-thump! The trail is clear—onward we hop.

Pre-merge checks and finishing touches

✅ Passed checks (3 passed)

Check name	Status	Explanation
Description Check	✅ Passed	Check skipped - CodeRabbit’s high-level summary is enabled.
Title Check	✅ Passed	The title succinctly and accurately summarizes the PR’s primary change: correcting a documentation reference from "next section" to "previous section" (as seen in docs/guide/tables.md). It is concise, relevant to the changeset, and follows a conventional "fix:" prefix.
Docstring Coverage	✅ Passed	No functions found in the changes. Docstring coverage check skipped.

✨ Finishing touches

🧪 Generate unit tests

• [ ] Create PR with unit tests
• [ ] Post copyable unit tests in a comment

[!TIP]

👮 Agentic pre-merge checks are now available in preview!

Pro plan users can now enable pre-merge checks in their settings to enforce checklists before merging PRs.

• Built-in checks – Quickly apply ready-made checks to enforce title conventions, require pull request descriptions that follow templates, validate linked issues for compliance, and more.
• Custom agentic checks – Define your own rules using CodeRabbit’s advanced agentic capabilities to enforce organization-specific policies and workflows. For example, you can instruct CodeRabbit’s agent to verify that API documentation is updated whenever API schema files are modified in a PR. Note: Upto 5 custom checks are currently allowed during the preview period. Pricing for this feature will be announced in a few weeks.

Please see the documentation for more information.

Example:

reviews:
  pre_merge_checks:
    custom_checks:
      - name: "Undocumented Breaking Changes"
        mode: "warning"
        instructions: |
          Pass/fail criteria: All breaking changes to public APIs, CLI flags, environment variables, configuration keys, database schemas, or HTTP/GraphQL endpoints must be documented in the "Breaking Change" section of the PR description and in CHANGELOG.md. Exclude purely internal or private changes (e.g., code not exported from package entry points or explicitly marked as internal).

Please share your feedback with us on this Discord post.

---

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 and usage tips.}