Complete AL review knowledge readiness (#108)

* Complete AL review knowledge readiness

Fill telemetry and Query coverage, strengthen thin review domains, correct audited content defects, and add deterministic cheap-model evaluation and reference-integrity safeguards.

Co-authored-by: Copilot App <223556219+Copilot@users.noreply.github.com>

Copilot-Session: 9825b012-e653-496a-9310-c1f4b6f8ac27

* Generalize review fixture discovery

Derive smoke cases from the leaf, domain, and paired-sample conventions so new leaves require no scoring-contract changes. Keep only exceptional selection/context overrides and fail when retrieval metadata cannot rank the selected article.

Co-authored-by: Copilot App <223556219+Copilot@users.noreply.github.com>

Copilot-Session: 9825b012-e653-496a-9310-c1f4b6f8ac27

* Preserve published field IDs in sample

Keep the existing Email and Contact Email field IDs unchanged, clarify that the sample represents an independent baseline, and use a local breaking-change rule for the generic smoke evaluation.

Co-authored-by: Copilot App <223556219+Copilot@users.noreply.github.com>

Copilot-Session: 9825b012-e653-496a-9310-c1f4b6f8ac27

* Clarify published field identity rules

State explicitly that a published field keeps its ID, name, and type while a replacement is added as a separate field under an unused ID.

Co-authored-by: Copilot App <223556219+Copilot@users.noreply.github.com>

Copilot-Session: 9825b012-e653-496a-9310-c1f4b6f8ac27

* Align field obsoletion sample baselines

Use Email field ID 3 as the shared baseline so the bad example demonstrates a same-ID rename while the good example retains the original field and adds a separate replacement.

Co-authored-by: Copilot App <223556219+Copilot@users.noreply.github.com>

Copilot-Session: 9825b012-e653-496a-9310-c1f4b6f8ac27

---------

Co-authored-by: Jesper Schulz-Wedde <jesper.schulzwedde@microsoft.com>

microsoft/knowledge/error-handling/fielderror-default-message-logic.md

@@ -14,5 +14,9 @@ application-area: [all]
 ## Best Practice
 For a plain required-field check, prefer `TestField`, which tests the condition and raises the error in one call. When the condition is non-trivial and has already been evaluated, call `FieldError(FieldNo)` with no message to get the localized default (`must have a value`, `is not valid`, etc.), or pass a short lowercase predicate such as `FieldError(FieldNo, 'must be a positive number')`. Start the custom text with a lowercase letter so it reads as one sentence with the auto-inserted caption, and use a field-number reference (or the field token) rather than a hard-coded field name so captions and translations stay correct. Let the framework supply the caption, value, table, and key context for you.
 
+See sample: `fielderror-default-message-logic.good.al`.
+
 ## Anti Pattern
-Re-testing a condition you already evaluated, or passing a fully formed sentence like `'The Amount field must be positive.'` to `FieldError`. The result reads as `Amount The Amount field must be positive. in Gen. Journal Line ...` — capital letter mid-sentence, caption and value repeated, and a stray trailing clause. Reviewer signals: a `FieldError` argument that names the field, restates the current value, starts with a capital letter, or ends with a period. Each is a sign the author treated `FieldError` like `Error` instead of as a predicate slotted into framework-generated context.
+Re-testing a condition you already evaluated, or passing a fully formed sentence like `'The Amount field must be positive.'` to `FieldError`. The result reads as `Amount The Amount field must be positive. in Gen. Journal Line ...` — capital letter mid-sentence, caption and value repeated, and a stray trailing clause. Reviewer signals: a `FieldError` argument that names the field, restates the current value, starts with a capital letter, or ends with a period. Each is a sign the author treated `FieldError` like `Error` instead of as a predicate slotted into framework-generated context.
+
+See sample: `fielderror-default-message-logic.bad.al`.

microsoft/knowledge/error-handling/fielderror-vs-testfield.md

@@ -14,5 +14,9 @@ application-area: [all]
 ## Best Practice
 Use `TestField` when the condition is a simple presence-or-equality check on a single field — mandatory-field gates and prerequisite checks at the top of a procedure read clearly and self-document intent. Use `FieldError` inside an `OnValidate` trigger or a validation procedure where surrounding business logic has already determined the value is invalid and you want a specific, custom message. Rely on the built-in field-and-record context both methods add rather than re-stating the field name in the text.
 
+See sample: `fielderror-vs-testfield.good.al`.
+
 ## Anti Pattern
 Calling `FieldError` to "test" a field — placing it on a path that is reached unconditionally and expecting it to validate — terminates execution every time because `FieldError` never evaluates a condition. The inverse smell is reaching for `TestField` when the rule needs a tailored message, then bolting a vague generic string onto a check that cannot express the real business reason. A reviewer can spot the first by a `FieldError` that is not guarded by a preceding `if`, and the second by a `TestField` whose intent comment describes a condition more complex than presence or equality.
+
+See sample: `fielderror-vs-testfield.bad.al`.

microsoft/knowledge/error-handling/ignored-tryfunction-return-disables-try-semantics.md

@@ -24,3 +24,7 @@ See sample: `ignored-tryfunction-return-disables-try-semantics.good.al`.
 Calling a `[TryFunction]` procedure as a standalone statement and assuming the attribute suppresses its errors. The call has ordinary error semantics because its Boolean result is ignored.
 
 See sample: `ignored-tryfunction-return-disables-try-semantics.bad.al`.
+
+## See also
+
+`microsoft/knowledge/performance/use-tryfunction-for-error-catching-not-rollback.md` owns transaction rollback expectations after a try method has actually caught an error.