Improve protocol implementation check to be based on signature compatibility

[mauvilsa]

Before submitting

• Did you read the contributing guideline?
• If you used a coding agent, did you fully understand and validate all generated code and ensure it follows the contributing guidelines?
• Did you update the documentation? (readme and public docstrings)
• Did you write unit tests such that there is 100% coverage on related code? (required for bug fixes and new features)
• Did you verify that new and existing tests pass locally?
• [n/a] If this is a bug fix, did you verify that the tests fail without the code fix?
• Did you make sure that all changes preserve backward compatibility?
• Did you update the CHANGELOG including a pull request link? (not for typos, docs, test updates, or minor internal changes/refactors)

[github-advanced-security]

CodeQL found more than 20 potential problems in the proposed changes. Check the Files changed tab for more details.

[codecov]

Codecov Report

✅ All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests.
✅ Project coverage is 100.00%. Comparing base (7a15fec) to head (6219f4e).
✅ All tests successful. No failed tests found.

Additional details and impacted files

@@            Coverage Diff            @@
##              main      #941   +/-   ##
=========================================
  Coverage   100.00%   100.00%           
=========================================
  Files           27        27           
  Lines         7885      7956   +71     
=========================================
+ Hits          7885      7956   +71     

☔ View full report in Codecov by Harness.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

[sonarqubecloud]

Quality Gate passed

Issues
1 New issue
0 Accepted issues

Measures
0 Security Hotspots
100.0% Coverage on New Code
0.0% Duplication on New Code

See analysis details on SonarQube Cloud