Q: Does it also catch nested schemas, and arrays etc.?

• It should catch nested schemas. I can add a unit test to be sure.
• What do you mean by catching arrays in this context? Can you give an example?

Thanks!

For arrays:

          ArraySchema: {
            type: 'array',
            items: {
              properties: {
                INVALID_FIELD: {},
              },
            },
          },

You mean the properties in items. Sure, let me add unit tests covering both and see how it works

Q: WDYT about also targeting inline schemas? Or should we only check component.schemas?

Great question! We should clarify what we mean by "field." To me, a field is a property of a resource schema, and resource schemas are typically defined under components.schemas. However, when I think about what I’d consider a resource schema, I’d primarily refer to response or requestBody content schemas as well.

So, are we specifically talking about inline schemas within those? Or, do we also count inline schemas used for query parameters? I’ve noticed that query parameters often use inline schemas, but they fall into a gray area—they're not path parameters, (the IPA for path params does not apply to them) and I’m not sure if their properties should be considered as fields

Yeah I think it could be valuable to catch fields in requests and responses as well, I'm working on the description IPA rule now and included them like so:

'$.paths[*][get,put,post,delete,options,head,patch,trace]..content..properties[*]'

In terms of query parameters, it's a good point. We don't talk a lot about them in the IPAs, but I'm thinking they should also be camelCase. Perhaps we can bring a new guideline for this. I think we can leave them out of this PR at least