Fix broken links in docs

[AdrianDAlessandro]

Description

There are some broken links in the docs. Some are causing PR failures, but they don't necessarily line up with the broken links in the deployed docs. This PR will address these broken links.

Opening in draft because the CI workflow needs to be updated so the link checker is actually checking against the equivalent of the deployed docs. Edit: Ignoring broken links in old versions of the docs. These would be very difficult to continue to keep up to date. One problem is that this means the most recent release will include some broken links.

Fixes #1408

Type of change

• Bug fix (non-breaking change to fix an issue)
• New feature (non-breaking change to add functionality)
• Refactoring (non-breaking, non-functional change to improve maintainability)
• Optimization (non-breaking change to speed up the code)
• Breaking change (whatever its nature)
• Documentation (improve or add documentation)

Key checklist

• All tests pass: $ cargo test
• The documentation builds and looks OK: $ cargo doc
• Update release notes for the latest release if this PR adds a new feature or fixes a bug
  present in the previous release

Further checks

• Code is commented, particularly in hard-to-understand areas
• Tests added that prove fix is effective or that feature works

[codecov]

Codecov Report

✅ All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests.
✅ Project coverage is 89.78%. Comparing base (bdc4a1a) to head (f01eaaf).

Additional details and impacted files

@@           Coverage Diff           @@
##             main    #1473   +/-   ##
=======================================
  Coverage   89.78%   89.78%           
=======================================
  Files          60       60           
  Lines        8439     8439           
  Branches     8439     8439           
=======================================
  Hits         7577     7577           
  Misses        545      545           
  Partials      317      317           

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

🚀 New features to boost your workflow:

• ❄️ Test Analytics: Detect flaky tests, report on failures, and find test suite problems.

[Copilot]

Pull request overview

This PR updates documentation URL generation and link-checking to address broken links in the generated docs (including rustdoc pages) and to make CI’s link checker operate against the built documentation output.

Changes:

• Update docs_url! to support an explicit documentation “version segment” (e.g. dev) when composing documentation URLs.
• Fix an in-code rustdoc link to point at the dev docs location.
• Update the docs link-checking workflow to resolve absolute paths against the built book/ output.

Reviewed changes

Copilot reviewed 4 out of 4 changed files in this pull request and generated 2 comments.

File	Description
src/simulation/prices.rs	Adjust rustdoc link to use the dev docs URL segment.
src/lib.rs	Extend docs_url! macro to accept an explicit version segment for URL construction.
docs/api/muse2/README.md	Update the published API-docs URL to the dev docs location.
.github/workflows/check-docs.yml	Configure Lychee to resolve absolute links relative to the built book/ output.

---

💡 Add a code-review agent skill or configure MCP servers for context-aware, tailored reviews. Learn more in the docs.

[tsmbland]

Am I right in thinking that the "dev" needs to be here because this page didn't exist when we made the last release? Whereas the dispatch optimisation page did exist hence why we don't need it there.

If so, when we make the next release, will we have to come back and remove this?

Seems a bit inconsistent anyway if the API docs sometimes link to the latest release docs and sometimes to the dev docs (although I appreciate that this is annoyingly fiddly and we've probably had this conversation already!)

[AdrianDAlessandro]

Yes, that's precisely it. We could instead make them always link to the dev version of the docs, so they're consistent?

We're never going to get a nice consistent behaviour here. We're at the mercy of how it's being deployed. MDBook builds the docs expecting to be the only thing deployed at that URL, and we're then changing where it is and building old versions of docs so we have (currently) three copies of it, none of which are at the base url. Any new pages we reference will only exist under dev until we make a release. A cleaner way to do all of this would be to only build docs on release, instead of merging to main. Then we will never have the problem of the latest release not having certain pages. But that's not helpful for people that are using the latest version of the code.