use -> used.

The language here feels too specific for an operator to me.

If this example demands language like that, we should change the example.

I want to be able to emphasise that this works with native commands based on $?/$LASTEXITCODE and not just with cmdlets/functions.

Fixed.

I would put this note immediately under the Long Description

Moved

I want to stay away from the specifics of the example this early in the doc. I'll give a better example below

See my updates

A better example might be this:

# Create a new SSH key pair and if successful, copy the public key to the clipboard
ssh-keygen -t rsa -b 2048 && Get-Content -Raw ~\.ssh\id_rsa.pub | clip

See my updates

I omitted a thing here about && and || being left associative (so cmd1 && cmd2 && cmd3 is the same as [cmd1 && cmd2] && cmd3), but wasn't sure if that's too technical here.

It's relevant if you do something like:

Get-Item ./file.txt || Write-Error 'File not found' && Get-Content -Raw ./file.txt

The associativity means that Get-Content will be executed based on the result of Get-Item || Write-Error, so if Get-Item succeeds it is executed, but if it doesn't Write-Error runs, which by definition does not succeed, so Get-Content does not succeed.

I think it would be good to a note about associativity. Can associativity be altered using paretheses or braces? For example:

(Get-Item ./file.txt || Write-Error 'File not found') && Get-Content -Raw ./file.txt
{Get-Item ./file.txt || Write-Error 'File not found'} && Get-Content -Raw ./file.txt

Parentheses currently don't work nicely because they always set $? to $true... That's always been the case unfortunately, although this feature has many people talking about changing it.

Unfortunately the dot-sourced scriptblock also suffers from this.

Ok, I've added a note about associativity, plus a bit about (...) etc setting $?

Looks good. Thanks