Re-incorporate support for arm-id

[wwendyc]

Reverts #21860

Re-incorporating arm-id back to common types now that it's supported by API validation in RPaaS.

[openapi-workflow-bot]

Hi, @wwendyc Thanks for your PR. I am workflow bot for review process. Here are some small tips.

Please ensure to do self-check against checklists in first PR comment.

PR assignee is the person auto-assigned and responsible for your current PR reviewing and merging.

For specs comparison cross API versions, Use API Specs Comparison Report Generator

If there is CI failure(s), to fix CI error(s) is mandatory for PR merging; or you need to provide justification in PR comment for explanation. How to fix?

Any feedback about review process or workflow bot, pls contact swagger and tools team. vscswagger@microsoft.com

[openapi-pipeline-app]

Swagger Validation Report

️❌BreakingChange: 13 Errors, 0 Warnings failed [Detail]

compared swaggers (via Oad v0.10.4)]	new version	base version
customermanagedkeys.json	4.0(d4a78c0)	4.0(main)
types.json	4.0(d4a78c0)	4.0(main)
types.json	4.0(d4a78c0)	4.0(main)

Rule	Message
❌ 1023 - TypeFormatChanged	The new version has a different format than the previous one. New: common-types/resource-management/v4/customermanagedkeys.json#L52:13 Old: common-types/resource-management/v4/customermanagedkeys.json#L52:13
❌ 1023 - TypeFormatChanged	The new version has a different format than the previous one. New: common-types/resource-management/v4/types.json#L14:9 Old: common-types/resource-management/v4/types.json#L14:9
❌ 1023 - TypeFormatChanged	The new version has a different format than the previous one. New: common-types/resource-management/v4/types.json#L14:9 Old: common-types/resource-management/v4/types.json#L14:9
❌ 1023 - TypeFormatChanged	The new version has a different format than the previous one. New: common-types/resource-management/v4/types.json#L14:9 Old: common-types/resource-management/v4/types.json#L14:9
❌ 1023 - TypeFormatChanged	The new version has a different format than the previous one. New: common-types/resource-management/v4/types.json#L14:9 Old: common-types/resource-management/v4/types.json#L14:9
❌ 1023 - TypeFormatChanged	The new version has a different format than the previous one. New: common-types/resource-management/v4/types.json#L14:9 Old: common-types/resource-management/v4/types.json#L14:9
❌ 1023 - TypeFormatChanged	The new version has a different format than the previous one. New: common-types/resource-management/v5/types.json#L14:9 Old: common-types/resource-management/v5/types.json#L14:9
❌ 1023 - TypeFormatChanged	The new version has a different format than the previous one. New: common-types/resource-management/v5/types.json#L14:9 Old: common-types/resource-management/v5/types.json#L14:9
❌ 1023 - TypeFormatChanged	The new version has a different format than the previous one. New: common-types/resource-management/v5/types.json#L14:9 Old: common-types/resource-management/v5/types.json#L14:9
❌ 1023 - TypeFormatChanged	The new version has a different format than the previous one. New: common-types/resource-management/v5/types.json#L14:9 Old: common-types/resource-management/v5/types.json#L14:9
❌ 1023 - TypeFormatChanged	The new version has a different format than the previous one. New: common-types/resource-management/v5/types.json#L14:9 Old: common-types/resource-management/v5/types.json#L14:9
❌ 1023 - TypeFormatChanged	The new version has a different format than the previous one. New: common-types/resource-management/v5/types.json#L429:9 Old: common-types/resource-management/v5/types.json#L428:9
❌ 1023 - TypeFormatChanged	The new version has a different format than the previous one. New: common-types/resource-management/v5/types.json#L434:9 Old: common-types/resource-management/v5/types.json#L432:9

️️✔️Breaking Change(Cross-Version) succeeded [Detail] [Expand]

There are no breaking changes.

️️✔️CredScan succeeded [Detail] [Expand]

There is no credential detected.

️️✔️LintDiff succeeded [Detail] [Expand]

Validation passes for LintDiff.

️️✔️Avocado succeeded [Detail] [Expand]

Validation passes for Avocado.

️️✔️ApiReadinessCheck succeeded [Detail] [Expand]

️️✔️~[Staging] ServiceAPIReadinessTest succeeded [Detail] [Expand]

Validation passes for ServiceAPIReadinessTest.

️❌SwaggerAPIView: 1 Errors, 0 Warnings failed [Detail]

Rule	Message
❌ Failed to generate swagger APIView. The readme file format is invalid and the tag is not defined. Use the provided readme template for guidance readme template. For more details, please check the detail log.	"How to fix":"Check the readme file and make sure the readme file format is valid and the tag is defined. Use the provided readme template"

️️✔️CadlAPIView succeeded [Detail] [Expand]

️️✔️TypeSpecAPIView succeeded [Detail] [Expand]

️️✔️ModelValidation succeeded [Detail] [Expand]

Validation passes for ModelValidation.

️️✔️SemanticValidation succeeded [Detail] [Expand]

Validation passes for SemanticValidation.

️️✔️PoliCheck succeeded [Detail] [Expand]

Validation passed for PoliCheck.

️️✔️PrettierCheck succeeded [Detail] [Expand]

Validation passes for PrettierCheck.

️️✔️SpellCheck succeeded [Detail] [Expand]

Validation passes for SpellCheck.

️️✔️Lint(RPaaS) succeeded [Detail] [Expand]

Validation passes for Lint(RPaaS).

️️✔️CadlValidation succeeded [Detail] [Expand]

Validation passes for CadlValidation.

️️✔️TypeSpec Validation succeeded [Detail] [Expand]

Validation passes for TypeSpec Validation.

️️✔️PR Summary succeeded [Detail] [Expand]

Validation passes for Summary.

_{Posted by Swagger Pipeline | How to fix these errors?}

[openapi-pipeline-app]

Swagger pipeline restarted successfully, please wait for status update in this comment.

[openapi-pipeline-app]

Swagger pipeline restarted successfully. If there is ApiView generated, it will be updated in this comment.

[openapi-workflow-bot]

Hi @wwendyc, one or multiple breaking change(s) is detected in your PR. Please check out the breaking change(s), and provide business justification in the PR comment and @ PR assignee why you must have these change(s), and how external customer impact can be mitigated. Please ensure to follow breaking change policy to request breaking change review and approval before proceeding swagger PR review.
Action: To initiate an evaluation of the breaking change, create a new intake using the template for breaking changes. Addition details on the process and office hours are on the Breaking change Wiki.
If you want to know the production traffic statistic, please see ARM Traffic statistic.
If you think it is false positive breaking change, please provide the reasons in the PR comment, report to Swagger Tooling Team via https://aka.ms/swaggerfeedback.
Note: To avoid breaking change, you can refer to Shift Left Solution for detecting breaking change in early phase at your service code repository.

[mikekistler]

Breaking changes previously reviewed and approved in https://github.com/Azure/azure-rest-api-specs-pr/pull/12897

[abatishchev]

[wwendyc]

@mikekistler @rkmanda can one of you please review and merge this PR?