Regenerate microsoft/knowledge from upstream BCApps instructions

The previous LLM-generated knowledge files contained factual
hallucinations. The most visible was the claim that `FindFirst` /
`FindLast` "forces a full-table scan" on an unfiltered record - it does
not; those APIs return a single row via the current key.

Other inaccuracies the audit found and fixed:

* `FindSet(true)` was described as "taking a LockTable". The correct
  upstream phrasing is that `FindSet(true)` sets
  `ReadIsolation::UpdLock` on the read. UpdLock and LockTable are
  related but distinct mechanisms.
* The list of production-scale tables had been invented beyond the
  upstream source (e.g. "Detailed Cust. Ledg. Entry") without a
  citation. The regenerated list matches the ten tables upstream lists
  with their P95 row counts.
* `SetLoadFields` guidance had been augmented with an extra mechanism
  claim ("the database resolves the filter using the index without
  hydrating the value") not present in upstream.

Approach: full regeneration of `microsoft/knowledge/` from the six
upstream BCApps Code Review instruction files, with Microsoft Learn /
the AL language reference as a secondary source. Every claim in every
regenerated file is anchored to a verbatim upstream quote (or a Learn
URL); the audit trail lives in artifacts/trace-<domain>.json on the
session workspace.

The PR #11 transaction/error-handling cluster is preserved verbatim:

* performance/understand-implicit-transaction-boundary.md
* performance/codeunit-run-as-atomic-sub-operation.{md,good.al,bad.al}
* performance/codeunit-run-requires-prior-commit-inside-transaction.{md,good.al,bad.al}
* performance/use-tryfunction-for-error-catching-not-rollback.{md,good.al,bad.al}
* performance/avoid-commit-inside-loops.{md,good.al,bad.al}
* security/commitbehavior-attribute-scopes-explicit-commits.{md,good.al,bad.al}
* testing/transactionmodel-attribute-governs-test-transactions.{md,good.al,bad.al}

These articles already cite Microsoft Learn and were carefully
cross-referenced; the regeneration skips their topics rather than
duplicating them.

File counts after regeneration:

  performance   35 .md  (5 preserved + 30 new)
  privacy       17 .md
  security      18 .md  (1 preserved + 17 new)
  style         33 .md
  testing        1 .md  (preserved)
  ui            19 .md
  upgrade       18 .md

Total 141 atomic knowledge files, each strictly one rule. All pass
.github/scripts/validate_frontmatter.py with 0 errors and 0 warnings.

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

microsoft/knowledge/style/begin-on-same-line-as-then-else-do.md

@@ -0,0 +1,26 @@
+---
+bc-version: [all]
+domain: style
+keywords: [begin, end, compound-statement, aa0005, codecop, formatting]
+technologies: [al]
+countries: [w1]
+application-area: [all]
+---
+
+# `begin` goes on the same line as `then`, `else`, or `do` (CodeCop AA0005)
+
+## Description
+
+When a compound block follows `then`, `else`, or `do`, the `begin` keyword must sit on the same line as the preceding keyword, separated by exactly one space. `if Condition then begin` and `for i := 1 to N do begin` are correct. The form that puts `begin` on its own line — common in older AL and in languages like Pascal — is flagged by CodeCop AA0005. The rule does not change indentation of the block body; it only governs the placement of `begin` relative to `then`/`else`/`do`.
+
+## Best Practice
+
+`if Condition then begin … end;`, `else begin … end;`, `for i := 1 to N do begin … end;`. The block body is indented one level below the `if`/`for` line, and `end;` sits at the same indentation as the line that opened the block.
+
+See sample: `begin-on-same-line-as-then-else-do.good.al`.
+
+## Anti Pattern
+
+A line that ends with `then` (or `else`, or `do`) and is followed by a line whose only content is `begin`. The compiler accepts it but CodeCop AA0005 flags it; the visual cost is a wasted line per block and a layout that looks alien to readers used to current AL style.
+
+See sample: `begin-on-same-line-as-then-else-do.bad.al`.