My suggestion is to add a "table of contents" at the top of non-trivial sections that simply lists available functions by name (generally ignoring argument variations) and a quick one line description of purpose. Once a person finds the name of the function that suits their needs they can then reference the main table for details, warnings, and examples.
This is what TOCs are for, no?
Are you criticizing my over-explanation of the phrase "table of contents" here?
Why do you think that?
I'm agreeing this is why TOCs were invented.
Because agreement without elaboration usually just merits a +1 so I read more into the statement than you intended.