feat(guidebook): more tutorials

[novusnota]

Closes #94. I've applied AI review suggestions here already.

The change in package.json is from #552 — I've decided to split those PRs into two to simplify review processes, but in order for the linter to pass some settings from that one had to come over to this one.

[github-actions]

Thanks for the docs updates around the guidebook pages. One blocking fix is needed before merge.

Findings (1)

High (1)

[HIGH] Broken internal link to missing page

Location: https://github.com/tact-lang/mintlify-ton-docs/blob/da15a207d96b1f5e16c345981874e8c2f83d1634/guidebook/more.mdx?plain=1#L219-L222

Description:
The “See examples” card links to /techniques/examples, but no such page exists in the repo. The style guide marks broken or missing anchors as release‑blocking (https://github.com/tact-lang/mintlify-ton-docs/blob/main/contribute/style-guide-extended.mdx?plain=1#L25-L33). Other pages reference this route as well, but they are outside this diff and serve only as corroboration.

Suggestion:
Remove the card until a valid target exists, or update href to a live internal page. Minimal removal:

   <Columns cols={2}>
-  <Card
-    title="See examples"
-    icon="code-simple"
-    href="/techniques/examples"
-  />
 
   <Card
     title="Tolk gas benchmark contracts"
     icon="code"

[novusnota]

The “See examples” card links to /techniques/examples, but no such page exists in the repo.

Yes, and I've added it in another PR, which precedes this one — #552.

[verytactical]

I think this article could use more simple formatting.

It's just a list of different resources. The extra space could have been used to describe why that particular class/course is different from the others.

[github-actions]

Thanks for the PR and the clear changes. Based on the diff between main and pr_head, I found no issues and no fixes are needed at this time.

[github-actions]

Thanks for the updates. I reviewed the changes between main and pr_head; I found no issues, and no fixes are needed.

[github-actions]

Thanks for pushing this PR. I reviewed the changes between main and pr_head across the updated files, and I found no issues—no fixes needed from my side.

[github-actions]

Thanks for the PR. I reviewed the diff from main to pr_head; the changes look clean and focused.

I found no issues in this review; no fixes needed.