Update our app fees doc

[pedromcunha]

No description provided.

[github-actions]

Claude finished @pedromcunha's task in 47s —— View job

---

Code Review

• Gather context and read changed files
• Review changes against documentation standards
• Post review feedback

---

Overall: Looks good! This is a solid documentation update that improves clarity and accuracy across the fees page. Here's my detailed review:

What's good

• Relay Fees description improved: The old description ("25% of swap fees and app fee") is replaced with a much clearer explanation about flat basis point fees. This is more informative for integrators.
• Fixed backtick formatting: expanded price impact → expandedPriceImpact — this now matches the actual API field name, which is important for developers referencing it.
• Expanded Price Impact descriptions: Each field now includes helpful context (e.g., what "execution" covers, what "swap" includes). Much better for discoverability.
• New sponsored field documented: Good addition reflecting the fee sponsorship feature.
• New Tip callout and Fee Sponsorship section: The recommended display mapping and sponsorship details are useful additions for integrators.

Minor suggestions

1. Line 26 — trailing backslashes:

   ...please check out our [App Fees Doc](/features/app-fees).\
   \
   

   These trailing backslashes for line continuation are a bit unusual in MDX. Consider removing them and using a normal paragraph break instead. This was pre-existing, not introduced in this PR, so not a blocker.

2. Line 32 — "Relay related fee" phrasing:

   These fees are only the Relay related fee, and are segmented as the following fees:
   

   Minor: "Relay related fee" could be clearer as "Relay-related fees" (hyphenated, plural). Also pre-existing.

3. Line 69 — sponsoredFeeComponents parameter reference: Consider formatting as sponsoredFeeComponents (bold + backticks) to match the CLAUDE.md convention for parameter names. Currently it's just bold.

   Fix this →

4. Line 67 — subsidizeFees formatting: Same as above — already correctly uses subsidizeFees (bold + backticks). Nice consistency there.

No blocking issues. Approving this as-is — the suggestions above are optional polish.