docs: fix dots docs thanks to roxygen2's warning about useless inheritParams

[maelle]

Co-Authored-By: Claude Sonnet 5

Running document() generated warnings about useless inheritParams (and a missing namespace in a link).

I think that when we added dots to force users to name optional parameters, we might have not paid enough attention to the resulting manual pages. When a function with the "rlang dots" was documented on the same page as a function with other dots (dots actually forwarded to another function), the documentation used the docs of that other dots params, which is incorrect.

[github-actions]

This is how benchmark results would change (along with a 95% confidence interval in relative change) if 81e2dd3 is merged into main:

• ✔️as_adjacency_matrix: 812ms -> 804ms [-2.27%, +0.5%]
• ✔️as_biadjacency_matrix: 795ms -> 787ms [-2.23%, +0.39%]
• ✔️as_data_frame_both: 1.83ms -> 1.8ms [-3.52%, +0.98%]
• ✔️as_long_data_frame: 4.58ms -> 4.44ms [-6.09%, +0.02%]
• ✔️es_attr_filter: 2.81ms -> 2.81ms [-2.73%, +2.56%]
• ✔️graph_from_adjacency_matrix: 124ms -> 125ms [-0.4%, +2.84%]
• ✔️graph_from_data_frame: 3.98ms -> 3.95ms [-2.37%, +0.69%]
• ✔️vs_attr_filter: 1.61ms -> 1.61ms [-2.13%, +2.98%]
• ✔️vs_by_name: 1.05ms -> 1.02ms [-6.16%, +1.04%]
  Further explanation regarding interpretation and methodology can be found in the documentation.

[maelle]

I wonder whether in the cases of having the dots for S3 method consistency, the code should error and then we could stop documenting the dots differently.