Light up System.ClientModel interface decorations on public API surface

[christothes]

fixes #8326
This change adds allowed .nupkg dependencies to the compilation as references so that the compilation has the full metadata for interfaces that live in those dependencies. Prior to this change, interfaces in referenced assemblies such as System.ClientModel would never show up as public APIs for types that implement them.

Azure.Core.RehydrationToken before:

after: (results from local testing):

[annelo-msft]

This looks great! (From the "after" screenshot)

Will it work for all .NET packages? i.e. will IJsonModel<T> and IPersistableModel<T> start showing up for clients as well -- not just Azure.Core?

Many thanks!

[christothes]

Will it work for all .NET packages? i.e. will IJsonModel<T> and IPersistableModel<T> start showing up for clients as well -- not just Azure.Core?

Good question - I will need to test this since the current behavior change will interrogate the dependencies for the primary nupkg being reviewed. For clients, I think they would only depend on Azure.Core, which then depends on System.ClientModel. So I may need to recursively follow dependencies for it to work with other clients.

If you could point me to an existing client that implements a type that would be decorated with a System.ClientModel interface, I can validate.

[annelo-msft]

If you could point me to an existing client that implements a type that would be decorated with a System.ClientModel interface, I can validate.

Looks like Azure.AI.OpenAI and Azure.Security.CodeTransparency both do.

[christothes]

Looks like clients take a direct dependency on System.ClientModel so we should be good!

[m-nash]

The imagine showing the apiview has an expansion of the interfaces which I am not sure we want.

For instance it shows IJsonModel<T> and IPersitableModel<T>. The actual class only specifies IJsonModel<T> https://github.com/Azure/azure-sdk-for-net/blob/main/sdk/core/Azure.Core/src/RehydrationToken.Serialization.cs#L11.

I do see that we do this with IEnumerable<T> expanding it to IEnumerable, but just wondering if we really want this as it the very first thought I had was why are we explicitly specifying IPersistableModel<T> but I had to dig into the code to find out we don't.