I am unable to see that your change adds any information to the original set of sentences, or that it resolves any ambiguity, or even clarifies the set. Your changes create redundancy. That is almost harmless, except that it dilutes the simpler fact conveyed by the original sentence. In my view, that is detrimental, as it is a disfavor to those who read its preceding sentences carefully, forcing them to read more words than were necessary. It could even trigger a useless reread by those who wonder if some subtly new information is conveyed by the later sentence. (The natural mental question is: Is this merely repetition?) Personally, I find repetition in documentation to be annoying, and it makes me think the author could not bother to tighten it up. If you had a suggested change for the whole set of sentences that **reduces** word count and better conveys the concept you apparently missed, without degrading clarity of the other concepts, then it might be attractive.