Cleaning up doc strings

[drewoldag]

This is work that accrues to rail issue 22 (LSSTDESC/rail#22)

Multiple people are contributing to this PR. Generally we've broken up the rail_base repo by top level directories. In the following list, if there's a check box, it means that the directory has already been looked over.

• cli
• core (finished algo_utils, common_param, data)
• creation (Creation docstrings #78)
• estimation (partially finished with CatEstimator)
• evaluation
• example_data - not really any doc strings here.
• stages - no doc strings here

Code Quality

• My code follows the code style of this project
• I have written unit tests or justified all instances of #pragma: no cover; in the case of a bugfix, a new test that breaks as a result of the bug has been added
• My code contains relevant comments and necessary documentation for future maintainers; the change is reflected in applicable demos/tutorials (with output cleared!) and added/updated docstrings use the NumPy docstring format
• Any breaking changes, described above, are accompanied by backwards compatibility and deprecation warnings

[codecov]

Codecov Report

All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅

Comparison is base (263b2a6) 96.96% compared to head (ca3aad5) 96.96%.

Additional details and impacted files

@@           Coverage Diff           @@
##             main      #75   +/-   ##
=======================================
  Coverage   96.96%   96.96%           
=======================================
  Files          32       32           
  Lines        1714     1714           
=======================================
  Hits         1662     1662           
  Misses         52       52           

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

[sschmidt23]

Looks good, thanks Drew.

[eacharles]

Thanks!