reword @PMMBN javdoc

Author: fluentfuture

mug/src/main/java/com/google/mu/annotations/ParametersMustMatchByName.java

@@ -32,11 +32,14 @@
  *   new Profile(currentUser.getId(), currentUser.getName())
  * }</pre>
  *
- * But it will fail to compile if the constructor were defined as {@code
- * record Profile(String userName, String userId)}. The {@code currentUser.getId()} expression
- * matches the {@code userId} parameter name because the effective tokens of {@code
- * currentUser.getId()} is {@code ["current", "user", "id"]} ("get" and "is" prefixes are ignored),
- * which includes as a subsequence the {@code ["user", "id"]} tokens from {@code userId}.
+ * But if you changed the constructor signature to {@code
+ * record Profile(String userName, String userId)}. it will fail to compile because the parameter
+ * name doesn't match the provided arguments.
+ * 
+ * <p>The {@code currentUser.getId()} expression matches the {@code userId} parameter name
+ * because the effective tokens of {@code currentUser.getId()} is {@code ["current", "user", "id"]}
+ * ("get" and "is" prefixes are ignored). It includes as a subsequence the {@code ["user", "id"]}
+ * tokens from {@code userId}.
  *
  * <p>If the argument expression is indeed as expected despite not matching the parameter name,
  * you can always add an explicit comment to tell the compiler <em>and the code readers</em> that: