Changed intro slightly so it might be more clear

What does this MR do?

As the related issue shows, the handbook page comes up first in search results. I opened another MR to update the handbook page (gitlab-com/www-gitlab-com!102927 (merged)) and I wanted to edit this page intro a bit as well, to see if we can affect the search results.

Related issues

Related to: gitlab-com/www-gitlab-com#13031 (closed)

Author's checklist

• Optional. Consider taking the GitLab Technical Writing Fundamentals course.
• Follow the:
  • Documentation process.
  • Documentation guidelines.
  • Style Guide.
• If you're adding or changing the main heading of the page (H1), ensure that the product tier badge is added.
• If you are a GitLab team member, request a review based on:
  • The documentation page's metadata.
  • The associated Technical Writer.

If you are a GitLab team member and only adding documentation, do not add any of the following labels:

• ~"frontend"
• ~"backend"
• ~"type::bug"
• ~"database"

These labels cause the MR to be added to code verification QA issues.

Reviewer's checklist

Documentation-related MRs should be reviewed by a Technical Writer for a non-blocking review, based on Documentation Guidelines and the Style Guide.

• If the content requires it, ensure the information is reviewed by a subject matter expert.
• Technical writer review items:
  • Ensure docs metadata is present and up-to-date.
  • Ensure the appropriate labels are added to this MR.
  • Ensure a release milestone is set.
  • If relevant to this MR, ensure content topic type principles are in use, including:
    • The headings should be something you'd do a Google search for. Instead of Default behavior, say something like Default behavior when you close an issue.
    • The headings (other than the page title) should be active. Instead of Configuring GDK, say something like Configure GDK.
    • Any task steps should be written as a numbered list.
    • If the content still needs to be edited for topic types, you can create a follow-up issue with the docs-technical-debt label.
• Review by assigned maintainer, who can always request/require the reviews above. Maintainer's review can occur before or after a technical writer review.

added docsimprovement documentation typemaintenance labels

assigned to @sselhorn

Suggested Reviewers (beta)

This is an experimental ML-based code reviewer recommendation system created by ~"group::applied ml".

The individuals below may be good candidates to participate in the review based on various factors.

After you review all recommendations, please assign reviewers manually, as this is not done automatically.

You can use slash commands in comments to quickly assign /assign_reviewer @user1.

Reviewers
@smcgivern, @marin, @ealcantara, @rspeicher, @reprazent

If you do not believe these recommendations are useful or if you do not want to use any of the suggestions, please apply the label Bad Suggested Reviewer. You can also provide feedback for this feature on this issue: https://gitlab.com/gitlab-org/gitlab/-/issues/357923.

Automatically generated by Suggested Reviewers Bot

	1 Warning
	This merge request does not refer to an existing milestone.

	1 Message
	This merge request adds or changes documentation files. A review from the Technical Writing team before you merge is recommended. Reviews can happen after you merge.

Documentation review

The following files require a review from a technical writer:

• doc/user/markdown.md

The review does not need to block merging this merge request. See the:

• Metadata for the *.md files that you've changed. The first few lines of each *.md file identify the stage and group most closely associated with your docs change.
• The Technical Writer assigned for that stage and group.
• Documentation workflows for information on when to assign a merge request for review.

Generated by Danger

changed the description

changed milestone to %15.0

added Technical Writing label

requested review from @eread

@eread Can you look at this for me? I trust your judgment about whether this language still makes sense or not... Thanks.

resolved all threads

approved this merge request

merged

@eread, did you forget to run a pipeline before you merged this work? Based on our code review process, if the latest pipeline finished more than 2 hours ago, you should:

1. Ensure the merge request is not in Draft status.
2. Start a pipeline (especially important for Community contribution merge requests).
3. Set the merge request to merge when pipeline succeeds.

(Improve this message?)

mentioned in commit 7cbc66b5

resolved all threads

added workflowstaging-canary label

added workflowcanary label and removed workflowstaging-canary label

added workflowstaging label and removed workflowcanary label

added workflowproduction label and removed workflowstaging label

added releasedcandidate label