Add EmptyDocComment lint rule

[raman976]

Add EmptyDocComment lint rule to flag empty ## documentation comments (single or multiple) with no meaningful text.

Fixes #632

Before submitting this PR, please make sure:

For external contributors:

• You have read the contributing guide in its entirety.
• You have not used AI on any parts of this pull request.

For all contributors:

• You have added a few sentences describing the PR here.
• You have added yourself or the appropriate individual as the assignee.
• You have added at least one relevant code reviewer to the PR.
• Your code builds clean without any errors or warnings.
• You have added tests (when appropriate).
• You have added an entry in the CHANGELOG (when appropriate).
• You have updated the README or other documentation to account for these changes (when appropriate).
• You have made a PR to the next branch in the sprocket.bio repository (when appropriate).

For PRs containing lint rule changes:

• You have updated any and all effected entries within RULES.md.
• You have added a test case in crates/wdl-lint/tests/lints that covers every
  possible diagnostic emitted for the rule within the file where the rule
  is implemented.

[a-frantz]

this will need to be rebased/merged due to the changes in #614 . Thanks for the contribution, I can review it once the conflicts are resolved and the CI is passing ✅

[raman976]

Hey, @Serial-ATA @a-frantz ,I have resolved the merge conflicts and have also applied the suggested changes, please review them and let me know if anything needs to be changed.

[claymcleod]

A few suggestions — the main issue is false-positives on paragraph separators in doc blocks.

[raman976]

Hey @claymcleod @Serial-ATA I have done the changes , thank you reviewing it, tell me if something still needs to be changed , I would be happy to do so

[Serial-ATA]

Just some notes for the docs

[raman976]

Hey @Serial-ATA , thanks for the suggestions, I’ve applied them

[claymcleod]

A couple small things:

[Serial-ATA]

LGTM after the changes above

[raman976]

Thanks for the review @claymcleod . I was being extra careful and over-commented this method. I’ve removed the redundant inline comments and kept it consistent with the surrounding rules.