The get_circuit_smart_contract_verifier function name may be overkill. Since the main input to this function is a circuit_id, I would think any user has the context required to assume the contract is circuit specific. Consider changing the name to get_smart_contract_verifier or get_solidity_verifier for brevity. Especially for users who might have to type this repeatedly.
Final note, my main reason for pointing this out is that the line-wrap breaks up the continuity of our table of contents in the reference page:
The
get_circuit_smart_contract_verifierfunction name may be overkill. Since the main input to this function is acircuit_id, I would think any user has the context required to assume the contract is circuit specific. Consider changing the name toget_smart_contract_verifierorget_solidity_verifierfor brevity. Especially for users who might have to type this repeatedly.Final note, my main reason for pointing this out is that the line-wrap breaks up the continuity of our table of contents in the reference page: