fix(docs): correct EAS variable naming and attestation UID access

[SaeeDawod]

• Fix variable naming conflict (const EAS = new EAS -> const eas = new EAS)
• Fix attestation UID access (receipt.attestationUID -> newAttestationUID from tx.wait())
• Apply fixes to all 4 EAS documentation files for consistency
• Ensures code examples work correctly when copied by developers

[sourcery-ai]

Sorry @SaeeDawod, you have reached your 24-hour rate limit for Sourcery. Please try again later

[gemini-code-assist]

Summary of Changes

Hello @SaeeDawod, I'm Gemini Code Assist¹! I'm currently reviewing this pull request and will post my feedback shortly. In the meantime, here's a summary to help you and other reviewers quickly get up to speed!

This pull request focuses on enhancing the accuracy and usability of code examples within the documentation related to the Ethereum Attestation Service (EAS). The primary goal is to ensure that developers can directly copy and use the provided code snippets without encountering errors. This is achieved by addressing a variable naming conflict and correcting the approach for accessing attestation UIDs, making the documentation more reliable and developer-friendly.

Highlights

• Variable Naming Correction: Resolved a variable naming conflict by changing "const EAS = new EAS" to "const eas = new EAS" for proper instantiation of the EAS object.
• Attestation UID Access Fix: Updated the method for retrieving the attestation UID, switching from "receipt.attestationUID" to directly using the result of "tx.wait()" as "newAttestationUID".
• Documentation Consistency: Applied these critical fixes consistently across four different EAS documentation files to ensure uniformity and correctness of code examples.
• Enhanced Code Usability: Improved the usability of documentation by making code examples directly copy-pastable and functional for developers.

Using Gemini Code Assist

The full guide for Gemini Code Assist can be found on our documentation page, here are some quick tips.

Invoking Gemini

You can request assistance from Gemini at any point in your pull request via creating an issue comment (i.e. comment on the pull request page) using either /gemini <command> or @gemini-code-assist <command>. Below is a summary of the supported commands.

Feature	Command	Description
Code Review	/gemini review	Performs a code review for the current pull request in its current state.
Pull Request Summary	/gemini summary	Provides a summary of the current pull request in its current state.
Comment	@gemini-code-assist	Responds in comments when explicitly tagged, both in issue comments and review comments.
Help	/gemini help	Displays a list of available commands.

Customization

To customize Gemini Code Assist for GitHub experience, repository maintainers can create a configuration file and/or provide a custom code review style guide (such as PEP-8 for Python) by creating and adding files to a .gemini/ folder in the base of the repository. Detailed instructions can be found here.

Limitations & Feedback

Gemini Code Assist may make mistakes. Please leave feedback on any instances where its feedback is incorrect or counter productive. You can react with 👍 and 👎 on @gemini-code-assist comments. If you're interested in giving your feedback about your experience with Gemini Code Assist for Github and other Google products, sign up here.

You can also get AI-powered code generation, chat, as well as code reviews directly in the IDE at no cost with the Gemini Code Assist IDE Extension.

Footnotes

1. Review the Privacy Notices, Generative AI Prohibited Use Policy, Terms of Service, and learn how to configure Gemini Code Assist in GitHub here. Gemini can make mistakes, so double check it and use code with caution. ↩

[github-actions]

To view in Slack, search for: 1755140306.804609

[gemini-code-assist]

Code Review

This pull request correctly addresses a variable naming conflict and fixes how the attestation UID is accessed in several documentation files. The changes ensure the code examples are accurate and follow common JavaScript conventions. I've added a few suggestions to improve the clarity of a comment in the code examples to avoid potential confusion for developers.

[gemini-code-assist]

The comment on line 336 is slightly misleading. In the context of the EAS SDK, tx.wait() on a transaction from eas.attest() is overridden to return the UID of the new attestation directly, not the full transaction receipt. A more accurate comment would clarify this for developers using this example.

    // Wait for confirmation and get the new attestation's UID
    const newAttestationUID = await tx.wait();

[gemini-code-assist]

The comment on line 336 is slightly misleading. In the context of the EAS SDK, tx.wait() on a transaction from eas.attest() is overridden to return the UID of the new attestation directly, not the full transaction receipt. A more accurate comment would clarify this for developers using this example.

    // Wait for confirmation and get the new attestation's UID
    const newAttestationUID = await tx.wait();

[gemini-code-assist]

The comment on line 368 is slightly misleading. In the context of the EAS SDK, tx.wait() on a transaction from eas.attest() is overridden to return the UID of the new attestation directly, not the full transaction receipt. A more accurate comment would clarify this for developers using this example.

    // Wait for confirmation and get the new attestation's UID
    const newAttestationUID = await tx.wait();

[gemini-code-assist]

The comment on line 333 is slightly misleading. In the context of the EAS SDK, tx.wait() on a transaction from eas.attest() is overridden to return the UID of the new attestation directly, not the full transaction receipt. A more accurate comment would clarify this for developers using this example.

    // Wait for confirmation and get the new attestation's UID
    const newAttestationUID = await tx.wait();