Expanded rule details

docs/rules/no-property-in-node.md

@@ -9,7 +9,7 @@
 When working with a node of type `ESTree.Node` or `TSESTree.Node`, it can be tempting to use the `'in'` operator to narrow the node's type.
 `'in'` narrowing is susceptible to confusing behavior from quirks of ASTs, such as node properties sometimes being omitted from nodes and other times explicitly being set to `null` or `undefined`.
 
-Using direct property checks is generally considered preferable.
+Instead, checking a node's `type` property is generally considered preferable.
 
 ## Rule Details
 
@@ -18,21 +18,37 @@ Examples of **incorrect** code for this rule:
 ```ts
 /* eslint eslint-plugin/no-property-in-node: error */
 
-declare const node: TSESTree.Parameter;
-
-if ('optional' in node) {
-  node.optional;
-}
+/** @type {import('eslint').Rule.RuleModule} */
+module.exports = {
+  meta: { /* ... */ },
+  create(context) {
+    return {
+      'ClassDeclaration, FunctionDeclaration'(node) {
+        if ('superClass' in node) {
+          console.log("This is a class declaration:", node);
+        }
+      },
+    };
+  },
+};
 ```
 
 Examples of **correct** code for this rule:
 
 ```ts
 /* eslint eslint-plugin/no-property-in-node: error */
 
-declare const node: TSESTree.Parameter;
-
-if (node.type !== TSESTree.AST_NODE_TYPES.TSParameterProperty) {
-  node.optional;
-}
+/** @type {import('eslint').Rule.RuleModule} */
+module.exports = {
+  meta: { /* ... */ },
+  create(context) {
+    return {
+      'ClassDeclaration, FunctionDeclaration'(node) {
+        if (node.type === 'ClassDeclaration') {
+          console.log("This is a class declaration:", node);
+        }
+      },
+    };
+  },
+};
 ```