docs(customization): Enhance documentation for missing view types in API

[ChetanSenta]

Description

Fixes #8319

Pillar

• 🎨 Pillar 1 — New Theme Design
• 📐 Pillar 2 — Geometric SVG Improvement
• 🕐 Pillar 3 — Timezone Logic Optimization
• 🛠️ Other (Bug fix, refactoring, docs)

What this PR does

lib/validations.ts's view enum has 13 real, fully-implemented values,
each with a working route in app/api/streak/route.ts. Both view
parameter table rows in docs/customization.md — the canonical
parameter reference — only documented 7-8 of them. 5 real views
(radar, doughnut, pie, activity_graph, commit_clock) were
completely undiscoverable from the docs. Added them to both tables, plus
a guard test asserting every real enum value gets a documentation mention.

Checklist before requesting a review:

• I have read the CONTRIBUTING.md file.
• I have tested these changes locally.
• I have run npm run format and npm run lint locally and resolved all errors.
• My commits follow the Conventional Commits format.
• I have made sure that I have only one commit to merge in this PR.

[vercel]

Someone is attempting to deploy a commit to the jhasourav07's projects Team on Vercel.

A member of the Team first needs to authorize it.

[retenta-bot]

This pull request addresses the documentation gap by adding missing view types to the API reference, which is crucial for developers using the library. It's great to see thorough testing included to ensure all enum values are documented. This aligns well with our past decisions to enhance testing and validation in our API routes. Thank you for your contributions, and I look forward to your updates!

[github-actions]

📦 Next.js Bundle Size Report (Gzipped Sizes)

✨ No significant bundle size changes detected.

📊 Summary of Totals

Category	PR Size	Base Size	Difference
Total JS	4052.50 KB	4052.50 KB	0 B
Total CSS	338.94 KB	338.94 KB	0 B

[Aamod007]

Documentation enhancement for missing view types plus validation test updates. CI failing, please fix.

Labels: level:beginner (2 files), quality:clean, type:docs, type:testing, mentor:Aamod007

[Aamod007]

Re-reviewing after noting the only CI failure is Vercel authorization (not code-related). All other checks (Format · Lint · Typecheck · Test, Production Build, CodeQL) pass. Approving — the Vercel deploy auth is a repo-level config issue, not a code problem.