Address review comments

Author: mbg

.github/copilot-instructions.md

@@ -13,18 +13,18 @@ The CodeQL Action is used in GitHub Actions workflows to run CodeQL scans using
 
 - When wording review comments, be helpful and friendly. Assume that the PR author has written the code with the best of intentions. Word your comments constructively as suggestions for improvements. Do not word suggestions as commands.
 - If you want to comment on a change that you believe will fail a CI check, do not present the CI failure you expect as a fact. Instead, write that you think a change "may" lead to a failure in CI. Suggest that, if such a failure manifests, the changes you are commenting on may be the place responsible for the failure and are worth looking at.
-- If a suggestion you make is suitable for a follow-up, mention that it can be addressed in a later PR rather than blocking this one.
-- If a change is a net improvement, for example because it improves on an existing limitation of existing code, do not complain about remaining limitations that were already present before the change. You can comment on it, but you should make it clear that the thing you are commenting on is not new by writing e.g. "Not new in this PR, but [..]" followed by your description of the issue and a suggestion that it could be improved at the same time with e.g. "Consider whether this is worth addressing as part of this PR as well."
+- If a suggestion you make is suitable for a follow-up, such as a refactoring that doesn't change the behaviour or fixing a typo in a comment, mention that it can be addressed in a later PR rather than blocking this one.
+- If a change is a net improvement, for example because it improves on an existing limitation of existing code, do not complain about pre-existing problems that remain. You may comment on them, but you should make it clear that the thing you are commenting on is not new by writing e.g. "Not new in this PR, but [..]" followed by your description of the issue and a suggestion that it could be improved at the same time with e.g. "Consider whether this is worth addressing as part of this PR as well."
 
 ## Generated code
 
-The CodeQL Action is written in TypeScript and compiled to JavaScript. Both the TypeScript sources and the **generated** JavaScript code are contained in this repository. The TypeScript sources are contained in the `src` directory and the JavaScript code is contained in the `lib` directory. A GitHub Actions workflow checks that the JavaScript code in `lib` is up-to-date. Therefore, you should not review any changes to the contents of the `lib` folder and it is expected that the JavaScript code in `lib` closely mirrors the TypeScript code it is generated from. The TypeScript sources in the `pr-checks` directory are not compiled.
+The main codebase of the CodeQL Action is written in TypeScript and compiled to JavaScript. Both the TypeScript sources and the **generated** JavaScript code are contained in this repository. The TypeScript sources are contained in the `src` directory and the JavaScript code is contained in the `lib` directory. A GitHub Actions workflow checks that the JavaScript code in `lib` is up-to-date. Therefore, you should not review any changes to the contents of the `lib` folder and it is expected that the JavaScript code in `lib` closely mirrors the TypeScript code it is generated from. The secondary TypeScript codebase has sources in the `pr-checks` directory, which are executed directly with `tsx` and not compiled to JavaScript in the `lib` folder.
 
 GitHub Actions workflows in the `.github/workflows` directory whose filenames start with two underscores (e.g. `__all-platform-bundle.yml`) are automatically generated using the `pr-checks/sync.sh` script from template files in the `pr-checks/checks` directory. Therefore, you do not need to review files in the `.github/workflows` directory that start with two underscores. However, you should review changes to the `pr-checks` directory as well as workflows in the `.github/workflows` directory that do not start with underscores.
 
 ## Release process
 
-Changes that are merged to `main` are not used in production straight away. Instead, changes from `main` must first be released using the release process, which has to be manually triggered by a member of staff. Therefore, it is possible for further changes to be made to the code after some changes have been merged to `main` but before they are released. Once the release process automation is started, a series of PRs are automatically generated:
+Changes that are merged to the `main` branch are not used in production straight away. Instead, changes from `main` must first be released using the release process, which has to be manually triggered by a staff member. Therefore, it is possible for further changes to be made to the code after some changes have been merged to `main` but before they are released. Once the release process automation is started, a series of PRs are automatically generated:
 
 - A release-PR is a PR which matches all of the following patterns: