Performed full review of c09797f...3d85365

Analysis

1. The documentation changes standardize naming conventions but don't address whether existing implementations with the previous naming patterns will continue to work, potentially causing backward compatibility issues for users following older documentation.

2. While the PR expands protocol support to include both HTTP and HTTPS, there's no mention of security considerations or guidance for when to use one protocol over the other, which could lead to improper implementations.

3. The PR appears to be documentation-focused without corresponding code changes - this may create a disconnect if the actual implementation doesn't fully support or validate the newly documented naming conventions and protocol options.

^{6 files reviewed | 0 comments | Review on Mesa | Edit Reviewer Settings}