Kerodon

In Definition 2.1.5.3, "for every object $X \in \mathcal{C}'$" should be "for every object $X \in \mathcal{C}$".

Example 2.1.5.2 should be placed after Example 2.1.5.17.

Yep; thanks!

2 lines before Proposition 2.1.5.4, "unique determined" should be "uniquely determined".

Yep; thanks!

There is a typo in Definition 2.1.5.2, "$\epsilon : \mathbf{1}_{\operatorname{\mathcal{D}}} \rightarrow G(\mathbf{1}_{\operatorname{\mathcal{C}}})$", there $G$ should be $F$.

Yep, thanks!

There is a type in Proposition 2.1.5.6. $\epsilon : \mathbf{1}_{\operatorname{\mathcal{D}}} \rightarrow G(\mathbf{1}_{\operatorname{\mathcal{C}}})$, $G$ should be $F$.

correction: There is a type in Proposition 2.1.5.6. $\epsilon : \mathbf{1}_{\operatorname{\mathcal{D}}} \rightarrow F(\mathbf{1}_{\operatorname{\mathcal{C}}})$, $F$ should be $G$.

Yep; thanks!

In proposition 00MS, the third line of the proof, might should be "if the outer diagram commutes"

Yep. Thanks!

Towards the end of the proof of Proposition 2.1.4.21, we read: "Using (a), we can reformulate condition (ii) as follows:". However, I don't think one is using (a) at all, nor the equivalence of (a) with (i) for that matter. What one uses are the formulas defining $\mu_{-,-}$ and $t(-,-)$ in terms of each other.

In the statement of condition (2) of Proposition 2.1.5.13, there are two instances of "$C'$" which should be just "$C$". The second diagram displayed in the proof of Proposition 2.1.5.13 is a composition of horizontal arrows, and the last of them should be labelled "$F(\lambda_X)$" instead of "$F(\lambda_X$".

Yep. Thanks!