docs(oxfmt): Improve docs for .oxfmtrc.jsonc config fields and add markdownDescription fields to JSON Schema

[connorshea]

We should probably also improve the type: string stuff in the output Markdown to serialize enums with their actual values, but that's a separate problem.

This also updates the logic for generating the oxfmtrc configuration_schema.json file so it properly matches the way we generate the configuration_schema.json for oxlint, including with markdownDescription fields. See the oxlintrc file here.

Before:

After:

[Copilot]

Pull request overview

This PR improves the documentation formatting for .oxfmtrc.jsonc configuration fields by consistently wrapping default values and special characters in backticks. This enhancement improves readability and ensures proper rendering in markdown-based documentation and JSON schema descriptions.

Key changes:

• Added backticks around all default values in doc comments (booleans, numbers, and string enums)
• Wrapped special characters like > in backticks for proper markdown rendering
• Split long documentation lines for improved readability (e.g., bracketSameLine description)

Reviewed changes

Copilot reviewed 4 out of 4 changed files in this pull request and generated no comments.

File	Description
crates/oxc_formatter/src/service/oxfmtrc.rs	Updated source doc comments to use backticks around default values and special characters
npm/oxfmt/configuration_schema.json	Generated JSON schema with improved description formatting
crates/oxc_formatter/tests/snapshots/schema_json.snap	Updated test snapshot reflecting schema changes
tasks/website_formatter/src/snapshots/schema_markdown.snap	Updated markdown documentation snapshot with improved formatting

---

💡 Add Copilot custom instructions for smarter, more guided reviews. Learn how to get started.

[codspeed-hq]

CodSpeed Performance Report

Merging #16587 will not alter performance

_{Comparing oxfmt-config-fields-docs (87ca29c) with main (28e0682)¹}

Summary

✅ 38 untouched
⏩ 7 skipped²

Footnotes

1. No successful run was found on main (569abe2) during the generation of this report, so 28e0682 was used instead as the comparison base. There might be some changes unrelated to this pull request in this report. ↩

2. 7 benchmarks were skipped, so the baseline results were used instead. If they were deleted from the codebase, click here and archive them to remove them from the performance reports. ↩

[leaysgur]

Thank you! And sorry for the late review.

Can you resolve the merge conflicts?

[connorshea]

@leaysgur rebased and ready to go :)

[leaysgur]

Thank you~!

[leaysgur]

Merge activity

• Dec 10, 2:16 AM UTC: The merge label '0-merge' was detected. This PR will be added to the Graphite merge queue once it meets the requirements.
• Dec 10, 2:21 AM UTC: leaysgur added this pull request to the Graphite merge queue.
• Dec 10, 2:28 AM UTC: Merged by the Graphite merge queue.