Integrate current review domains

Merge current main because it added four active AL review leaves, then extend the findings domain contract across all 15 leaves, generic composition guidance, plugin documentation, and the self-review knowledge-upgrade path.

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

Copilot-Session: 77d0a40e-8bf5-40ac-a450-40eb0255db03

microsoft/skills/review/al-style-review.md

@@ -53,13 +53,15 @@ When the post-conflict worklist is empty because no applicable style knowledge e
 
 For each worklist entry, evaluate the diff against the file's `## Best Practice` and `## Anti Pattern` sections. Style findings rarely reach `blocker` — reserve it for cases where the knowledge file documents a platform-level requirement (for example, API page property constraints the OData runtime rejects). Most style findings are `minor` or `info`; egregious misuse (`Error` with pre-built Text losing translation and telemetry classification) may reach `major`.
 
+Severity calibration — a formal analyzer already flags the mechanical presence/naming conventions (the `this` keyword AA0248, approved label suffixes AA0074, a missing `ToolTip`, required parentheses). On those, BCQuality's value is the *explanation* of why the rule exists, not a second gate; emit them at `info` so a consumer that gates on severity does not re-flag what CodeCop/AppSourceCop already reports. Reserve `minor` for style issues with concrete downstream impact the analyzer does not catch — a `Label` declared at procedure-local instead of object scope (no analyzer enforces label scope, and mis-scoped Labels are fragile in the translation pipeline), lost translation or telemetry classification from a string-built `Error`, an `OptionCaption` that does not match its `OptionMembers`, a misleading named invocation. This keeps the domain's default output advisory and prevents analyzer-redundant noise from competing with substantive review.
+
 Set `confidence` to:
 
 - `high` when the detection is based on an unambiguous pattern match.
 - `medium` when detection relies on heuristics or when any frontmatter dimension was `unknown`.
 - `low` when the finding is an advisory derived only from applicability.
 
-After evaluating each worklist entry, also consider whether the diff exhibits a style defect the agent recognises from its general AL knowledge that no knowledge file in the worklist covers. Such candidates are agent findings within this skill's domain — emit them with `references: []`, an `id` slug prefixed with `agent:`, `confidence` capped at `medium`, `severity` capped at `minor` (agent findings are advisory and non-gating), and a `message` that is self-contained (describing both the issue and a concrete recommendation, since there is no knowledge-file footer for the consumer to fall back on). Hold every candidate to the precision bar in `skills/do.md` (*Agent findings*): emit only a clear, widely-accepted AL style violation with a concrete basis a knowledgeable BC reviewer would agree on — steelman it first and drop personal preference, speculation, and any single defensible formatting choice among several; when in doubt, omit. The scope is strictly style; defects outside this domain belong to other leaves and MUST NOT be emitted here. Before emitting, check the worklist for a knowledge file that matches the candidate — if one exists, upgrade the candidate to a knowledge-backed finding instead. See `skills/do.md` for the full contract.
+After evaluating each worklist entry, also consider whether the diff exhibits a style defect the agent recognises from its general AL knowledge that no knowledge file in the worklist covers. Such candidates are agent findings within this skill's domain — emit them with `references: []`, an `id` slug prefixed with `agent:`, `confidence` capped at `medium`, `severity` capped at `minor` (agent findings are advisory and non-gating), and a `message` that is self-contained (describing both the issue and a concrete recommendation, since there is no knowledge-file footer for the consumer to fall back on). Hold every candidate to the precision bar in `skills/do.md` (*Agent findings*): emit only a clear, widely-accepted AL style violation with a concrete basis a knowledgeable BC reviewer would agree on — steelman it first and drop personal preference, speculation, and any single defensible formatting choice among several; when in doubt, omit. The scope is strictly style — naming, labelling, formatting, and analyzer-adjacent conventions. A correctness, logic, data-integrity, or contract defect is NOT a style finding even when it can be reworded as a convention: a method that mutates a shared `Record`'s filters, an unfiltered `DeleteAll`, a violated interface contract, or a wrong boolean guard are behavioural defects, not conventions — do not emit them here under a style framing. If a specific domain leaf covers the concern (performance, security, error-handling, …) it belongs there; if no knowledge file in any domain covers it, it belongs to the `al-code-review` super-skill's cross-cutting self-review agent channel (`from-sub-skill: "agent"`, `severity` capped at `minor`), not to this leaf. A reliable test: if you cannot cite a style `## Best Practice`/`## Anti Pattern` for the concern, it is very likely not a style finding. Before emitting, check the worklist for a knowledge file that matches the candidate — if one exists, upgrade the candidate to a knowledge-backed finding instead. See `skills/do.md` for the full contract.
 
 For every emitted finding, decide whether the fix is mechanical. A fix is mechanical when it is small, local, and unambiguous from the diff context (for example: delete unreachable lines; replace `Count() > 0` with `not IsEmpty()`; move a local `Label` to object scope; add a missing `ToolTip`, `OptionCaption`, or `DataClassification`; replace a string-concatenated `Error` with a Label-backed call; change an over-broad permission token; or add an obvious `else`/guard branch). For mechanical findings, emit `findings[].suggested-code` with the literal replacement for the source lines indicated by `location`. The payload must be a verbatim replacement — no diff markers, no fences, no commentary — that the consumer can render as a one-click suggestion. When a `.good.al` companion exists and the diff context matches the `.bad.al` shape, adapt the `.good.al` replacement into `suggested-code`.
 
@@ -82,20 +84,20 @@ Output conforms to the DO output contract. Every finding this skill emits MUST s
   "skill": { "id": "al-style-review", "version": 1 },
   "outcome": "completed",
   "summary": {
-    "counts": { "blocker": 0, "major": 0, "minor": 1, "info": 0 },
+    "counts": { "blocker": 0, "major": 0, "minor": 0, "info": 1 },
     "coverage": { "worklist-size": 1, "items-evaluated": 1 }
   },
   "findings": [
     {
-      "id": "microsoft/knowledge/style/apply-approved-label-suffixes.md",
-      "severity": "minor",
+      "id": "microsoft/knowledge/style/label-suffix-approved-list.md",
+      "severity": "info",
       "message": "A Label named Text000 has no approved suffix (Msg/Err/Qst/Tok/Lbl/Txt). Per the referenced CodeCop AA0074 guidance, every Label and TextConst carries a suffix indicating its consuming call.",
       "location": {
         "file": "src/Sales/PostingRoutines.Codeunit.al",
         "line": 42
       },
       "references": [
-        { "path": "microsoft/knowledge/style/apply-approved-label-suffixes.md" }
+        { "path": "microsoft/knowledge/style/label-suffix-approved-list.md" }
       ],
       "confidence": "high",
       "domain": "Style"
@@ -104,4 +106,3 @@ Output conforms to the DO output contract. Every finding this skill emits MUST s
   "suppressed": []
 }
 ```
-