docs: cleanup todo comments

[robert-zaremba]

Description

closes: #1197

---

Author Checklist

All items are required. Please add a note to the item if the item is not applicable and
please add links to any relevant follow up issues.

I have...

• included the correct type prefix in the PR title
• added ! to the type prefix if API or client breaking change
• added appropriate labels to the PR
• targeted the correct branch (see PR Targeting)
• provided a link to the relevant issue or specification
• added a changelog entry to CHANGELOG.md
• included comments for documenting Go code
• updated the relevant documentation or specification
• reviewed "Files changed" and left comments if necessary
• confirmed all CI checks have passed

Reviewers Checklist

All items are required. Please add a note if the item is not applicable and please add
your handle next to the items reviewed if you only reviewed selected items.

I have...

• confirmed the correct type prefix in the PR title
• confirmed all author checklist items have been addressed
• reviewed state machine logic
• reviewed API design and naming
• reviewed documentation is accurate
• reviewed tests and test coverage
• manually tested (if applicable)

[codecov-commenter]

Codecov Report

Merging #1231 (3a76f1c) into main (43c0441) will increase coverage by 0.00%.
The diff coverage is 0.00%.

@@           Coverage Diff           @@
##             main    #1231   +/-   ##
=======================================
  Coverage   51.20%   51.20%           
=======================================
  Files          67       67           
  Lines        6659     6657    -2     
=======================================
- Hits         3410     3409    -1     
+ Misses       3009     3008    -1     
  Partials      240      240           

Impacted Files	Coverage Δ
x/leverage/keeper/interest.go	72.29% <0.00%> (+0.29%)	⬆️
x/leverage/module.go	57.14% <ø> (ø)

[RafilxTenfen]

The Halborn audit suggested removing the TODO's from the code
I can't entirely agree with them, but I created the issue for us to discuss
If all the team decide to keep using TODO's in the middle of the code we should approve this

[adamewozniak]

The Halborn audit suggested removing the TODO's from the code I can't entirely agree with them, but I created the issue for us to discuss If all the team decide to keep using TODO's in the middle of the code we should approve this

Kind of silly to not allow todos in a codebase imo, especially since the todos we have don't really point to areas of confusion / possible vulnerabilities.

If these said "TODO: make this more secure", maybe I'd agree