We need to decide how to address these.

They're shown this way because these fields in IslandConfigOptions expect another pydantic model as the value, i.e., they have additional properties in the schema.

My plan ATM is to declare the type as object for these fields and add a "properties" field in the explanation (see c6baabc).

Should we list the acceptable values?

We don't have any constraints on the value in the code. It doesn't make sense to add it ourselves in the reference documentation.

It might be worth adding the constraints in the code.

I think we should nix the header at this level and do #### ssl_certificate_file and #### ssl_certificate_key_file. At the top level, there's no header for "properties". In other words, Under ## Configuration there is not ### Configuration Properties.

Same for mongo.

Looks mostly fine to me except that "start_mongodb" and "mongodb Default Value" are both h4.

You could omit "mongodb Default value". All of mongodb's properties have default values, so you can extrapolate the default value of the whole object from there. You could also provide an example of the whole file in a different subsection at the same level as ### Configuration Properties.