Move dotnet-scaffold telemetry article to docs/core/tools/

[Copilot]

The dotnet-scaffold telemetry article lived in dotnet/AspNetCore.Docs, but the tool isn't part of ASP.NET Core and the article belongs alongside the other .NET CLI tool telemetry docs in dotnet/docs. This recreates it here, next to telemetry.md and following the upgrade-assistant-telemetry.md precedent.

Changes

• New article docs/core/tools/dotnet-scaffold-telemetry.md, ported from the AspNetCore.Docs source with:
  • uid updated fundamentals/dotnet-scaffold-telemetry → core/tools/dotnet-scaffold-telemetry
  • Removed the aspnetcore-specific monikerRange
  • ".NET SDK telemetry" link changed to relative (telemetry.md)
  • Added ai-usage: ai-assisted frontmatter
• TOC docs/navigate/tools-diagnostics/toc.yml — added an entry under .NET SDK, after Telemetry.

Follow-up (separate repo, not in this PR)

Must land in dotnet/AspNetCore.Docs, which can't be edited from here:

• Redirect /aspnet/core/fundamentals/dotnet-scaffold-telemetry → the new dotnet/docs URL
• Delete the source file from AspNetCore.Docs

No dotnet/docs redirect entry was added since no prior redirect for this path existed.

• Fixes Move dotnet-scaffold telemetry article from aspnetcore.docs repo to docs/core/tools/ #55210

---

Internal previews

File	Preview link
docs/core/tools/dotnet-scaffold-telemetry.md	docs/core/tools/dotnet-scaffold-telemetry
docs/navigate/tools-diagnostics/toc.yml	docs/navigate/tools-diagnostics/toc

[Copilot]

Copilot was unable to review this pull request because there is no eligible user to bill. To allow Copilot reviews on bot-authored pull requests, enable direct organization billing in your organization's Copilot settings.

[Copilot]

Pull request overview

Copilot reviewed 2 out of 2 changed files in this pull request and generated no new comments.

Suppressed comments (3)

docs/core/tools/dotnet-scaffold-telemetry.md:42

• The sentence "Protecting your privacy is important to us" uses first-person language. In nearby telemetry docs, the wording avoids "us" (for example, "...important to Microsoft").

Protecting your privacy is important to us. If you suspect the telemetry feature is collecting sensitive data or the data is being insecurely or inappropriately handled, take one of the following actions:

docs/core/tools/dotnet-scaffold-telemetry.md:65

• Two rows in the data table have grammar and naming inconsistencies: "whether it succeed" should be past tense ("succeeded"), and the tool/scaffolder names should match the hyphenated package names used elsewhere in the table (dotnet-scaffold-aspnet / dotnet-scaffold-aspire).

| >=8.0        | dotnet-scaffold aspnet scaffolder validation method name and whether it succeed. |
| >=8.0        | dotnet-scaffold aspire scaffolder validation method name and whether it succeed. |

docs/core/tools/dotnet-scaffold-telemetry.md:20

• In the disclosure intro, "When you run ... the first time" is missing "for", and the sentence uses "may". Elsewhere in this repo, similar sections use "for the first time" and "might" (for example, telemetry.md).

This issue also appears in the following locations of the same file:

• line 42
• line 64

When you run the `dotnet-scaffold` tool the first time, it displays output similar to the following example. The text may vary slightly depending on the version of the tool you're running. This "first run" experience is how Microsoft notifies you about data collection.

[wadepickett]

Thanks @gewarren, I had set the pr ready for review even though it was not yet ready when I noticed I was getting this error from copilot:

Copilot was unable to review this pull request because there is no eligible user to bill. To allow Copilot reviews on bot-authored pull requests, enable direct organization billing in your organization's Copilot settings.

I was wondering if the same problem would show up the same way if I I set it for review and approved. So I sort of went down a rabbit hole. Sorry to generate a review request too early. Copilot did actually did run a review after that, so I assume the issue is that it didn't like that Copilot generated the orignial PR maybe?

[wadepickett]

Addressed all suggestions, reviewed and approved.

[wadepickett]

@gewarren, thanks for the great suggestions. I have addressed each, plus a few more edits and it is ready for another review.

[gewarren]

Also, is there anything we can link to about the tool itself? I didn't find anything about the tool in this repo.

[wadepickett]

Also, is there anything we can link to about the tool itself? I didn't find anything about the tool in this repo.

You are right there should be. I didn't originally write this article. tdykstra was listed as the author but may not be ther original one. At first I was just trying to move the file, to the correct repo but then it I realized it also needed some work. I will look into it, thanks for bringing that up.