My notes:

It's hard to judge because it worked. These notes really a comparison of conventional assumptions.

You had an opportunity to develop the other knight and instead pushed a flank pawn only one forward. That's a slow move.
After your knight was pinned by the bishop for a moment you effectively only had one minor piece developed (subtracting the pin), while he had three.

You remove the pin by moving the queen. Maybe it's good to move it less far but queen A4 was safe from what I can see. It would have pinned his knight. The only thing he could attack with was a pawn which would have been free to take. He can maybe move bishop back and then move the knight with tempo on the queen but I don't see anything he could do with that knight that you couldn't get out of.

The shorter move does reinforce the bishop and after looking at the whole game I get that you are basically building a dense structure between the start line and the center.

Your enemy did play kind of aweful. Attacked with a queen without a working idea or any pieces to support the attack, when they could have developed a knight instead. Undeveloped a knight that was find where it was instead of developing the other knight for one more move.

Also your enemy castled right into where you already had your rooks lined up, and had a shit ton of diagonals pointed at that corner. He had both options for castling. His worst move was that castle. If you look for ways he could have gotten out of the mate, even if somehow he dodged and managed to take a piece, you had so many reinforcements pointed that way it was hopeless for him.

If he had castled the other way that would have been more interesting.