Better commandref for noMsgVerbose

[sidey79]

• Please check if the PR fulfills these requirements
• [ ] Tests for the changes have been added / modified (needed for for bug fixes / features)
• [x] commandref has been added / updated (needed for bug fixes / features)

• What kind of change does this PR introduce? (Bug fix, feature, docs update, ...)

• [x] Bugfix (please link issue)

• [ ] Feature enhancement

• [x] Documentation update

• [ ] Unittest enhancement

• [ ] other

• What is the current behavior? (You can also link to an open issue here, if this describes the current behavior)

1240

• What is the new behavior (if this is a feature change)?

commandref is more clear

• Does this PR introduce a breaking change? (What changes might users need to make in their application due to this PR?)

no

• Other information:

[codecov[bot]]

Codecov Report

All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests :white_check_mark:

Project coverage is 89.61%. Comparing base (78b80d0) to head (6e579e1).

Additional details and impacted files

```diff @@ Coverage Diff @@ ## master #1241 +/- ## ========================================== + Coverage 88.92% 89.61% +0.68% ========================================== Files 43 43 Lines 2466 2466 Branches 170 170 ========================================== + Hits 2193 2210 +17 + Misses 119 102 -17 Partials 154 154 ``` | [Flag](https://app.codecov.io/gh/RFD-FHEM/RFFHEM/pull/1241/flags?src=pr&el=flags&utm_medium=referral&utm_source=github&utm_content=comment&utm_campaign=pr+comments&utm_term=RFD-FHEM) | Coverage Δ | | |---|---|---| | [fhem](https://app.codecov.io/gh/RFD-FHEM/RFFHEM/pull/1241/flags?src=pr&el=flag&utm_medium=referral&utm_source=github&utm_content=comment&utm_campaign=pr+comments&utm_term=RFD-FHEM) | `89.61% <ø> (+0.68%)` | :arrow_up: | | [modules](https://app.codecov.io/gh/RFD-FHEM/RFFHEM/pull/1241/flags?src=pr&el=flag&utm_medium=referral&utm_source=github&utm_content=comment&utm_campaign=pr+comments&utm_term=RFD-FHEM) | `89.61% <ø> (+0.68%)` | :arrow_up: | | [perl](https://app.codecov.io/gh/RFD-FHEM/RFFHEM/pull/1241/flags?src=pr&el=flag&utm_medium=referral&utm_source=github&utm_content=comment&utm_campaign=pr+comments&utm_term=RFD-FHEM) | `89.61% <ø> (+0.68%)` | :arrow_up: | | [unittests](https://app.codecov.io/gh/RFD-FHEM/RFFHEM/pull/1241/flags?src=pr&el=flag&utm_medium=referral&utm_source=github&utm_content=comment&utm_campaign=pr+comments&utm_term=RFD-FHEM) | `89.61% <ø> (+0.68%)` | :arrow_up: | Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. [Click here](https://docs.codecov.io/docs/carryforward-flags?utm_medium=referral&utm_source=github&utm_content=comment&utm_campaign=pr+comments&utm_term=RFD-FHEM#carryforward-flags-in-the-pull-request-comment) to find out more.

:umbrella: View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
:loudspeaker: Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

[sidey79]

Ich weiss nicht wer das mal eingebaut hat, aber ich benutzte es selbst auch nicht :)