Split `arm-resource-operation` lint rule into three focused rules by Copilot · Pull Request #4808 · Azure/typespec-azure

Copilot · 2026-07-02T21:54:33Z

The single arm-resource-operation rule was covering three unrelated checks with mixed concerns, making it hard to suppress selectively or tune severity independently.

Rule split

Rule	Check
`arm-resource-operation` (narrowed)	Operation must be inside an interface declaration
`arm-resource-operation-missing-decorator` (new)	Operation must use the correct ARM decorator for its HTTP verb (`@armResourceRead`, `@armResourceCreateOrUpdate`, etc.)
`arm-resource-operation-missing-api-version` (new)	Operation must include `Azure.ResourceManager.CommonTypes.ApiVersionParameter` — more specific than the `typespec-azure-core` equivalent which accepts any `apiVersion` string parameter

Both new rules are enabled in the resource-manager ruleset. All existing test coverage is preserved and split into per-rule test files.

Example: decorator check

@armResourceOperations
interface FooResources {
  // ❌ arm-resource-operation-missing-decorator
  @put createOrUpdate(...ResourceInstanceParameters<FooResource>, @bodyRoot resource: FooResource): ArmResponse<FooResource>;

  // ✅
  createOrUpdate is ArmResourceCreateOrReplaceAsync<FooResource>;
}

…issing-decorator and arm-resource-operation-missing-api-version Co-authored-by: catalinaperalta <9859037+catalinaperalta@users.noreply.github.com>

pkg-pr-new · 2026-07-08T14:44:51Z

Open in StackBlitz

npm i https://pkg.pr.new/@azure-tools/typespec-azure-resource-manager@4808

npm i https://pkg.pr.new/@azure-tools/typespec-azure-rulesets@4808

commit: e6375e7

Co-authored-by: catalinaperalta <9859037+catalinaperalta@users.noreply.github.com>

…n-missing-decorator Co-authored-by: catalinaperalta <9859037+catalinaperalta@users.noreply.github.com>

github-actions · 2026-07-08T23:10:00Z

⚡ Benchmark Results

⚠️ 9 metric(s) regressed above the +5% threshold:

Metric	Baseline	Current	Change
total	🔴 1.00s	🔴 1.06s	+5.5% 🔴
loader	🟡 303.7ms	🟡 327.9ms	+8.0% 🔴
linter	🟡 213.7ms	🟡 224.6ms	+5.1% 🔴
↳ linter/@azure-tools/typespec-azure-core/no-header-explode	🔴 26.5ms	🔴 28.2ms	+6.5% 🔴
↳ linter/@azure-tools/typespec-azure-core/no-query-explode	🔴 27.7ms	🔴 29.5ms	+6.8% 🔴
↳ linter/@azure-tools/typespec-azure-core/no-response-body	🔴 33.0ms	🔴 34.8ms	+5.3% 🔴
↳ linter/@azure-tools/typespec-azure-core/response-schema-problem	🔴 32.5ms	🔴 34.8ms	+7.0% 🔴
↳ linter/@azure-tools/typespec-azure-resource-manager/lro-location-header	🟡 19.6ms	🔴 21.0ms	+7.5% 🔴
↳ linter/@azure-tools/typespec-azure-resource-manager/no-response-body	🔴 29.8ms	🔴 32.3ms	+8.7% 🔴

Full details – comparing ea57559 vs baseline rolling-baseline-cd9c422-daec050 (rolling baseline (20 main runs))

Metric	Baseline	Current	Change
total	🔴 1.00s	🔴 1.06s	+5.5% 🔴
loader	🟡 303.7ms	🟡 327.9ms	+8.0% 🔴
resolver	🟢 39.8ms	🟢 40.2ms	+0.9%
checker	🟡 362.2ms	🟡 380.0ms	+4.9%
validation	🟢 84.5ms	🟢 86.9ms	+2.9%
↳ validation/@azure-tools/typespec-azure-core	🟡 12.5ms	🟡 13.2ms	+5.5%
↳ validation/@typespec/http	🟡 15.4ms	🟡 16.1ms	+4.3%
↳ validation/@typespec/rest	🟢 1.6ms	🟢 1.6ms	+0.4%
↳ validation/@typespec/versioning	🔴 50.9ms	🔴 51.9ms	+2.0%
↳ validation/compiler	🟢 3.8ms	🟢 4.0ms	+3.5%
linter	🟡 213.7ms	🟡 224.6ms	+5.1% 🔴
↳ linter/@azure-tools/typespec-azure-core/auth-required	🟢 0.1ms	🟢 0.1ms	+7.3%
↳ linter/@azure-tools/typespec-azure-core/bad-record-type	🟢 0.6ms	🟢 0.6ms	+1.3%
↳ linter/@azure-tools/typespec-azure-core/byos	🟢 8.3ms	🟢 8.6ms	+4.1%
↳ linter/@azure-tools/typespec-azure-core/casing-style	🟢 1.4ms	🟢 1.5ms	+2.6%
↳ linter/@azure-tools/typespec-azure-core/composition-over-inheritance	🟢 0.2ms	🟢 0.2ms	+2.4%
↳ linter/@azure-tools/typespec-azure-core/documentation-required	🟢 1.9ms	🟢 2.0ms	+2.1%
↳ linter/@azure-tools/typespec-azure-core/friendly-name	🟢 1.4ms	🟢 1.4ms	+3.5%
↳ linter/@azure-tools/typespec-azure-core/key-visibility-required	🟢 0.4ms	🟢 0.4ms	+3.5%
↳ linter/@azure-tools/typespec-azure-core/known-encoding	🟢 0.5ms	🟢 0.5ms	+8.2%
↳ linter/@azure-tools/typespec-azure-core/long-running-polling-operation-required	🟢 0.8ms	🟢 0.8ms	+1.5%
↳ linter/@azure-tools/typespec-azure-core/no-case-mismatch	🟢 0.7ms	🟢 0.7ms	+1.1%
↳ linter/@azure-tools/typespec-azure-core/no-closed-literal-union	🟢 1.0ms	🟢 1.0ms	-2.0%
↳ linter/@azure-tools/typespec-azure-core/no-enum	🟢 0.2ms	🟢 0.3ms	+3.1%
↳ linter/@azure-tools/typespec-azure-core/no-error-status-codes	🟢 0.3ms	🟢 0.3ms	+2.3%
↳ linter/@azure-tools/typespec-azure-core/no-explicit-routes-resource-ops	🟢 0.2ms	🟢 0.2ms	+1.8%
↳ linter/@azure-tools/typespec-azure-core/no-format	🟢 0.8ms	🟢 0.8ms	+2.4%
↳ linter/@azure-tools/typespec-azure-core/no-generic-numeric	🟢 0.8ms	🟢 0.9ms	+3.1%
↳ linter/@azure-tools/typespec-azure-core/no-header-explode	🔴 26.5ms	🔴 28.2ms	+6.5% 🔴
↳ linter/@azure-tools/typespec-azure-core/no-legacy-usage	🟢 2.0ms	🟢 2.2ms	+5.9%
↳ linter/@azure-tools/typespec-azure-core/no-multiple-discriminator	🟢 0.2ms	🟢 0.2ms	+7.5%
↳ linter/@azure-tools/typespec-azure-core/no-nullable	🟢 0.4ms	🟢 0.4ms	+3.4%
↳ linter/@azure-tools/typespec-azure-core/no-offsetdatetime	🟢 1.9ms	🟢 2.1ms	+5.7%
↳ linter/@azure-tools/typespec-azure-core/no-openapi	🟢 2.3ms	🟢 2.4ms	+2.5%
↳ linter/@azure-tools/typespec-azure-core/no-private-usage	🟢 3.1ms	🟢 3.2ms	+2.9%
↳ linter/@azure-tools/typespec-azure-core/no-query-explode	🔴 27.7ms	🔴 29.5ms	+6.8% 🔴
↳ linter/@azure-tools/typespec-azure-core/no-response-body	🔴 33.0ms	🔴 34.8ms	+5.3% 🔴
↳ linter/@azure-tools/typespec-azure-core/no-rest-library-interfaces	🟢 0.1ms	🟢 0.1ms	+3.0%
↳ linter/@azure-tools/typespec-azure-core/no-route-parameter-name-mismatch	🟢 7.6ms	🟢 8.1ms	+6.3%
↳ linter/@azure-tools/typespec-azure-core/no-rpc-path-params	🟢 0.4ms	🟢 0.4ms	+5.1%
↳ linter/@azure-tools/typespec-azure-core/no-string-discriminator	🟢 0.1ms	🟢 0.2ms	+6.0%
↳ linter/@azure-tools/typespec-azure-core/no-unknown	🟢 0.3ms	🟢 0.4ms	+9.0%
↳ linter/@azure-tools/typespec-azure-core/no-unnamed-union	🟢 0.8ms	🟢 0.8ms	+1.0%
↳ linter/@azure-tools/typespec-azure-core/operation-missing-api-version	🟢 0.4ms	🟢 0.4ms	-0.5%
↳ linter/@azure-tools/typespec-azure-core/request-body-problem	🟢 0.5ms	🟢 0.5ms	+0.7%
↳ linter/@azure-tools/typespec-azure-core/require-versioned	🟢 0.1ms	🟢 0.1ms	+3.0%
↳ linter/@azure-tools/typespec-azure-core/response-schema-problem	🔴 32.5ms	🔴 34.8ms	+7.0% 🔴
↳ linter/@azure-tools/typespec-azure-core/rpc-operation-request-body	🟢 0.7ms	🟢 0.7ms	+6.6%
↳ linter/@azure-tools/typespec-azure-core/spread-discriminated-model	🟢 0.5ms	🟢 0.5ms	+1.8%
↳ linter/@azure-tools/typespec-azure-core/use-standard-names	🟢 7.5ms	🟢 8.0ms	+5.7%
↳ linter/@azure-tools/typespec-azure-core/use-standard-operations	🟢 0.3ms	🟢 0.3ms	+1.7%
↳ linter/@azure-tools/typespec-azure-resource-manager/arm-agent-base-type-child-resources	🔴 21.4ms	🔴 21.9ms	+2.0%
↳ linter/@azure-tools/typespec-azure-resource-manager/arm-agent-base-type-lifecycle-operations	🟢 0.3ms	🟢 0.2ms	-3.3%
↳ linter/@azure-tools/typespec-azure-resource-manager/arm-common-types-version	🟡 12.1ms	🟡 12.5ms	+2.9%
↳ linter/@azure-tools/typespec-azure-resource-manager/arm-custom-resource-no-key	🟢 0.2ms	🟢 0.2ms	+5.6%
↳ linter/@azure-tools/typespec-azure-resource-manager/arm-custom-resource-usage-discourage	🟢 0.1ms	🟢 0.1ms	+2.1%
↳ linter/@azure-tools/typespec-azure-resource-manager/arm-delete-operation-response-codes	🟢 4.9ms	🟢 4.6ms	-6.1%
↳ linter/@azure-tools/typespec-azure-resource-manager/arm-no-path-casing-conflicts	🟡 17.0ms	🟡 17.0ms	-0.2%
↳ linter/@azure-tools/typespec-azure-resource-manager/arm-no-record	🟢 0.6ms	🟢 0.6ms	+4.1%
↳ linter/@azure-tools/typespec-azure-resource-manager/arm-post-operation-response-codes	🟢 1.4ms	🟢 1.4ms	+3.0%
↳ linter/@azure-tools/typespec-azure-resource-manager/arm-put-operation-response-codes	🟢 0.2ms	🟢 0.2ms	-4.6%
↳ linter/@azure-tools/typespec-azure-resource-manager/arm-resource-action-no-segment	🟢 0.4ms	🟢 0.4ms	-1.5%
↳ linter/@azure-tools/typespec-azure-resource-manager/arm-resource-duplicate-property	🟢 0.4ms	🟢 0.4ms	+2.3%
↳ linter/@azure-tools/typespec-azure-resource-manager/arm-resource-interface-requires-decorator	🟢 0.1ms	🟢 0.1ms	-0.9%
↳ linter/@azure-tools/typespec-azure-resource-manager/arm-resource-invalid-action-verb	🟢 0.2ms	🟢 0.1ms	-13.6%
↳ linter/@azure-tools/typespec-azure-resource-manager/arm-resource-invalid-envelope-property	🟢 0.3ms	🟢 0.3ms	+3.8%
↳ linter/@azure-tools/typespec-azure-resource-manager/arm-resource-invalid-version-format	🟢 0.2ms	🟢 0.2ms	+0.7%
↳ linter/@azure-tools/typespec-azure-resource-manager/arm-resource-key-invalid-chars	🟢 0.5ms	🟢 0.5ms	+4.5%
↳ linter/@azure-tools/typespec-azure-resource-manager/arm-resource-name-pattern	🟢 0.1ms	🟢 0.1ms	+7.9%
↳ linter/@azure-tools/typespec-azure-resource-manager/arm-resource-operation	🟢 0.5ms	🟢 0.2ms	-63.9%
↳ linter/@azure-tools/typespec-azure-resource-manager/arm-resource-operation-missing-api-version	🟢 0.0ms	🟢 0.2ms	+100.0%
↳ linter/@azure-tools/typespec-azure-resource-manager/arm-resource-operation-missing-decorator	🟢 0.0ms	🟢 0.3ms	+100.0%
↳ linter/@azure-tools/typespec-azure-resource-manager/arm-resource-operation-response	🟢 8.9ms	🟢 9.2ms	+3.3%
↳ linter/@azure-tools/typespec-azure-resource-manager/arm-resource-patch	🟢 0.8ms	🟢 0.9ms	+3.4%
↳ linter/@azure-tools/typespec-azure-resource-manager/arm-resource-path-segment-invalid-chars	🟢 0.4ms	🟢 0.4ms	+2.5%
↳ linter/@azure-tools/typespec-azure-resource-manager/arm-resource-provisioning-state	🟢 0.4ms	🟢 0.4ms	+0.6%
↳ linter/@azure-tools/typespec-azure-resource-manager/beyond-nesting-levels	🟢 0.2ms	🟢 0.2ms	+3.8%
↳ linter/@azure-tools/typespec-azure-resource-manager/empty-updateable-properties	🟢 0.4ms	🟢 0.4ms	+6.0%
↳ linter/@azure-tools/typespec-azure-resource-manager/improper-subscription-list-operation	🟢 0.1ms	🟢 0.1ms	+0.1%
↳ linter/@azure-tools/typespec-azure-resource-manager/lro-location-header	🟡 19.6ms	🔴 21.0ms	+7.5% 🔴
↳ linter/@azure-tools/typespec-azure-resource-manager/missing-operations-endpoint	🟢 0.1ms	🟢 0.2ms	+5.2%
↳ linter/@azure-tools/typespec-azure-resource-manager/missing-x-ms-identifiers	🟢 1.0ms	🟢 1.0ms	+1.3%
↳ linter/@azure-tools/typespec-azure-resource-manager/no-empty-model	🟢 0.3ms	🟢 0.3ms	+4.3%
↳ linter/@azure-tools/typespec-azure-resource-manager/no-override-props	🟢 0.3ms	🟢 0.3ms	+1.1%
↳ linter/@azure-tools/typespec-azure-resource-manager/no-resource-delete-operation	🟢 0.5ms	🟢 0.5ms	+2.9%
↳ linter/@azure-tools/typespec-azure-resource-manager/no-response-body	🔴 29.8ms	🔴 32.3ms	+8.7% 🔴
↳ linter/@azure-tools/typespec-azure-resource-manager/patch-envelope	🟢 0.4ms	🟢 0.4ms	+5.4%
↳ linter/@azure-tools/typespec-azure-resource-manager/resource-name	🟢 0.4ms	🟢 0.4ms	-0.2%
↳ linter/@azure-tools/typespec-azure-resource-manager/secret-prop	🟢 5.4ms	🟢 5.2ms	-3.5%
↳ linter/@azure-tools/typespec-azure-resource-manager/unsupported-type	🟢 0.7ms	🟢 0.7ms	-0.7%
↳ linter/@azure-tools/typespec-azure-resource-manager/version-progression	🟢 0.3ms	🟢 0.3ms	-1.9%
↳ linter/@azure-tools/typespec-client-generator-core/property-name-conflict	🟢 2.3ms	🟢 2.4ms	+3.3%
↳ linter/@azure-tools/typespec-client-generator-core/require-client-suffix	🟢 1.7ms	🟢 1.7ms	+2.5%
emit	🔴 6.01s	🔴 6.24s	+3.9%
↳ emit/@Azure-Tools	🟢 0.0ms	🟢 0.0ms	+0.0%
↳ emit/@azure-tools/typespec-autorest	🟢 124.4ms	🟢 128.9ms	+3.6%
↳ emit/@azure-tools/typespec-python	🔴 2.24s	🔴 2.33s	+4.0%
↳ emit/@typespec	🟢 0.0ms	🟢 0.0ms	+0.0%
↳ emit/@typespec/http-client-js	🔴 566.3ms	🔴 588.2ms	+3.9%
↳ emit/@typespec/openapi3	🟢 106.8ms	🟢 112.0ms	+4.8%
↳ emit/@typespec/openapi3/compute	🟢 92.8ms	🟢 97.3ms	+4.9%
↳ emit/@typespec/openapi3/write	🟢 13.8ms	🟢 14.4ms	+4.5%

Averaged across 3 specs (azure-arm-resource-manager, azure-core-dataplane, azure-full).
Threshold: changes > ±5% are highlighted.
🟢 Fast · 🟡 Moderate (stages >200ms, rules >10ms) · 🔴 Slow (stages >400ms, rules >20ms)

…ules Co-authored-by: catalinaperalta <9859037+catalinaperalta@users.noreply.github.com>

catalinaperalta · 2026-07-08T23:18:55Z

@copilot fix the format issue reported in this pr

Co-authored-by: catalinaperalta <9859037+catalinaperalta@users.noreply.github.com>

Copilot · 2026-07-08T23:24:17Z

@copilot fix the format issue reported in this pr

Fixed in the latest commit. Ran prettier on the 5 files flagged by the Format CI job: linter.ts, arm-resource-operation-missing-decorator.ts, core-operations.ts, and both rule .md files.

markcowl · 2026-07-09T00:56:38Z

+  - "@azure-tools/typespec-azure-rulesets"
+---
+
+Split `arm-resource-operation` lint rule: add `arm-resource-operation-missing-decorator` and `arm-resource-operation-missing-api-version` as separate rules. The original rule now only checks that operations are inside an interface declaration.


Suggested change

Split `arm-resource-operation` lint rule: add `arm-resource-operation-missing-decorator` and `arm-resource-operation-missing-api-version` as separate rules. The original rule now only checks that operations are inside an interface declaration.

Split `arm-resource-operation` lint rule: add `use-operation-decorator` and `use-api-version` as separate rules. The original rule now only checks that operations are inside an interface declaration.

@copilot rename the arm-resource-operation-missing-decorator to use-operation-decorator and the arm-resource-operation-missing-api-version to use-api-version and update references to these rule names

Done. Renamed arm-resource-operation-missing-decorator → use-operation-decorator and arm-resource-operation-missing-api-version → use-api-version across all source files, tests, ruleset, README, website docs, and the chronus change file. Updated the changelog text per @markcowl's suggestion.

markcowl · 2026-07-09T01:07:43Z

+  },
+});
+
+const resourceOperationDecorators: { [verb in HttpVerb]: string[] } = {


Hmm, looks like this rule was out of date, we also need to include some newer decorators:

$extensionResourceOperation, $legacyResourceOperation, $builtInResourceOperation, $legacyExtensionResourceOperation

https://github.com/Azure/typespec-azure/blob/main/packages/typespec-azure-resource-manager/lib/private.decorators.tsp#L156-L235

This might remove a lot of false positives. Ideally we would check that the operationType parameter matches the operation verb for these.

And should add a test for each

I am kind of dubious about looking for decorators rather than using an accessor as a mechanism, but we can maybe add this fix later.

@copilot address these comments

Done. Added $extensionResourceOperation, $legacyResourceOperation, $builtInResourceOperation, and $legacyExtensionResourceOperation to the resourceOperationDecorators map (shared across all relevant HTTP verbs) so operations bearing any of these private ARM decorators won't be flagged. Added a test for each decorator in a new "Private ARM resource decorators" describe block.

markcowl · 2026-07-09T01:13:43Z

+  ...ResourceGroupParameter;
+  ...ProviderNamespace<TResource>;
+  ...KeysOf<TResource>;
+  ...CommonTypes.ApiVersionParameter;


ApiersionParameter always goes first and is in the Azure.ResourceManager namespace here: https://github.com/Azure/typespec-azure/blob/main/packages/typespec-azure-resource-manager/lib/parameters.tsp#L13

(so ...ApiVersionParameter should be the first line

@copilot address this comment

Fixed — ...ApiVersionParameter is now the first line in the custom parameters model example, and the spread uses the Azure.ResourceManager alias (...ApiVersionParameter) instead of ...CommonTypes.ApiVersionParameter.

markcowl · 2026-07-09T01:15:39Z

+
+  @armResourceAction(FooResource)
+  @action
+  @post


Always include the post path in the @action decorator

@copilot address this comment

Fixed — updated @action to @action("myAction") in the explicit-decorator correct example.

timotheeguerin · 2026-07-09T17:15:35Z

+    return {
+      operation: (operation: Operation) => {
+        if (
+          !isSourceOperationResourceManagerInternal(operation) &&


I think we don't need this check anymore, this was added before linters would scope to the project sources

Is the linter already scoping automatically or do I need to insert another check into the rule?

timotheeguerin · 2026-07-09T17:16:50Z

  name: "arm-resource-operation",
  severity: "warning",
-  description: "Validate ARM Resource operations.",
+  description: "Validate ARM Resource operations are defined inside an interface declaration.",


should that rule also be renamed while we are at it? feels the name is not very clear on the purpose here

Totally agree, maybe something like resource-operation-interface-required or resource-operation-requires-interface?

timotheeguerin · 2026-07-09T17:17:58Z

+@azure-tools/typespec-azure-resource-manager/arm-resource-operation-missing-decorator
+```
+
+Validate that ARM Resource operations use the correct decorator for the HTTP verb.


those rules in theory would only apply for custom operations right? should we add a :::note for that?

@copilot address this comment

Added a :::note block clarifying that this rule only applies to custom operations and that operations using standard ARM resource templates automatically satisfy it.

…/rules/arm-resource-operation-missing-api-version.md Co-authored-by: Mark Cowlishaw <1054056+markcowl@users.noreply.github.com>

…version Co-authored-by: catalinaperalta <9859037+catalinaperalta@users.noreply.github.com>

…tionDecoratorRule, useApiVersionRule) Co-authored-by: catalinaperalta <9859037+catalinaperalta@users.noreply.github.com>

…fix docs Co-authored-by: catalinaperalta <9859037+catalinaperalta@users.noreply.github.com>

Initial plan

b360055

Copilot AI assigned Copilot and catalinaperalta Jul 2, 2026

Copilot started work on behalf of catalinaperalta July 2, 2026 22:05 View session

Copilot AI linked an issue Jul 2, 2026 that may be closed by this pull request

[resource-manager]: Update @azure-tools/typespec-azure-resource-manager/arm-resource-operation to split rules #4719

Open

feat: split arm-resource-operation rule into arm-resource-operation-m…

8b31d46

…issing-decorator and arm-resource-operation-missing-api-version Co-authored-by: catalinaperalta <9859037+catalinaperalta@users.noreply.github.com>

microsoft-github-policy-service Bot added int:azure-specs Run integration tests against azure-rest-api-specs lib:azure-resource-manager Issues for @azure-tools/typespec-azure-core library meta:website TypeSpec.io updates linter Issues related to linter rules labels Jul 2, 2026

Copilot AI changed the title ~~[WIP] Update @azure-tools/typespec-azure-resource-manager to split rules~~ Split arm-resource-operation lint rule into three focused rules Jul 2, 2026

Copilot finished work on behalf of catalinaperalta July 2, 2026 22:26

Copilot AI requested a review from catalinaperalta July 2, 2026 22:26

catalinaperalta reviewed Jul 8, 2026

View reviewed changes

Comment thread ...cs/docs/libraries/azure-resource-manager/rules/arm-resource-operation-missing-api-version.md Outdated

Copilot started work on behalf of catalinaperalta July 8, 2026 22:00 View session

catalinaperalta reviewed Jul 8, 2026

View reviewed changes

Comment thread website/src/content/docs/docs/libraries/azure-resource-manager/rules/use-operation-decorator.md

docs: add direct spread of ApiVersionParameter affirmative example

1020a72

Co-authored-by: catalinaperalta <9859037+catalinaperalta@users.noreply.github.com>

Copilot finished work on behalf of catalinaperalta July 8, 2026 22:01

Copilot AI requested a review from catalinaperalta July 8, 2026 22:01

Copilot started work on behalf of catalinaperalta July 8, 2026 22:02 View session

docs: add explicit decorator correct example to arm-resource-operatio…

2e2817f

…n-missing-decorator Co-authored-by: catalinaperalta <9859037+catalinaperalta@users.noreply.github.com>

Copilot finished work on behalf of catalinaperalta July 8, 2026 22:03

Merge branch 'main' into copilot/update-arm-resource-operation-rules

ac91c2b

Copilot started work on behalf of catalinaperalta July 8, 2026 23:06 View session

fix: add missing run import and regenerate ARM docs with new linter r…

eb6f8cb

…ules Co-authored-by: catalinaperalta <9859037+catalinaperalta@users.noreply.github.com>

microsoft-github-policy-service Bot added the eng label Jul 8, 2026

Copilot finished work on behalf of catalinaperalta July 8, 2026 23:12

Copilot started work on behalf of catalinaperalta July 8, 2026 23:19 View session

style: fix prettier formatting in ARM linter rules and docs

e6375e7

Co-authored-by: catalinaperalta <9859037+catalinaperalta@users.noreply.github.com>

Copilot finished work on behalf of catalinaperalta July 8, 2026 23:24

markcowl requested changes Jul 9, 2026

View reviewed changes

timotheeguerin reviewed Jul 9, 2026

View reviewed changes

Copilot started work on behalf of catalinaperalta July 9, 2026 21:58 View session

catalinaperalta and others added 3 commits July 9, 2026 14:59

Update website/src/content/docs/docs/libraries/azure-resource-manager…

1452948

…/rules/arm-resource-operation-missing-api-version.md Co-authored-by: Mark Cowlishaw <1054056+markcowl@users.noreply.github.com>

feat: rename ARM linter rules to use-operation-decorator and use-api-…

988733b

…version Co-authored-by: catalinaperalta <9859037+catalinaperalta@users.noreply.github.com>

refactor: rename exported constants to match new rule names (useOpera…

c51a9f4

…tionDecoratorRule, useApiVersionRule) Co-authored-by: catalinaperalta <9859037+catalinaperalta@users.noreply.github.com>

Copilot finished work on behalf of catalinaperalta July 9, 2026 22:12

Copilot started work on behalf of catalinaperalta July 9, 2026 22:13 View session

feat: add private ARM decorators to use-operation-decorator rule and …

1e7cc9c

…fix docs Co-authored-by: catalinaperalta <9859037+catalinaperalta@users.noreply.github.com>

Copilot finished work on behalf of catalinaperalta July 9, 2026 22:31

Uh oh!

Conversation

Copilot AI commented Jul 2, 2026 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Rule split

Example: decorator check

Uh oh!

pkg-pr-new Bot commented Jul 8, 2026 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

github-actions Bot commented Jul 8, 2026

⚡ Benchmark Results

Uh oh!

catalinaperalta commented Jul 8, 2026

Uh oh!

Copilot AI commented Jul 8, 2026

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Copilot AI Jul 9, 2026

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Copilot AI Jul 9, 2026

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Copilot AI Jul 9, 2026

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

catalinaperalta Jul 9, 2026 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Copilot AI Jul 9, 2026

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Copilot AI Jul 9, 2026

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Reviewers

Assignees

Labels

Projects

Milestone

Development

Uh oh!

4 participants

Copilot AI commented Jul 2, 2026 •

edited

Loading

pkg-pr-new Bot commented Jul 8, 2026 •

edited

Loading

catalinaperalta Jul 9, 2026 •

edited

Loading