Court-tested wording beats generic wording
Trampoline parks are one of the few activity categories with a real body of litigation behind them, and the pattern in the decisions is consistent: releases fail when the risk description is generic. A signer who agreed to "the risks of recreational activity" did not knowingly accept a double-bounce fracture. A signer who agreed to a paragraph naming double bouncing, awkward landings, collisions in the foam pit, flips, and dodgeball contact did.
So the assumption-of-risk section should read like your incident log, not like boilerplate. Name the attractions you actually operate — main court, foam pit, ninja course, drop tower, dodgeball — and the specific mechanism of injury on each.