Description

Expose Aspire's interaction service to polyglot AppHosts through callback IServiceProvider instances, matching the existing pattern for other services available from callback service providers. Polyglot integration authors can now resolve the interaction service and prompt users from TypeScript, Python, Go, and Java AppHosts.

This adds ATS-friendly interaction wrappers for availability checks, confirmation prompts, message boxes, single input prompts, multiple input prompts, and notifications. The wrappers return non-generic result DTOs so the generated SDKs do not need to model InteractionResult<T> directly. The generated SDK baselines and compile-time validation AppHosts were updated across TypeScript, Python, Go, Java, and Rust, and Java option DTO names were kept idiomatic without a Dto suffix.

User-facing usage

TypeScript AppHosts can resolve and use the interaction service from callback service providers:

const interactionService = executionContext.serviceProvider.getInteractionService();
const isAvailable = interactionService.isAvailable();

interactionService.promptMessageBoxAsync("Message", "Message body", {
  options: {
    intent: MessageIntent.INFORMATION
  }
});

Java AppHosts get natural generated option names:

var interactionService = executionContextServiceProvider.getInteractionService();
var options = new MessageBoxInteractionOptions();
options.setIntent(MessageIntent.INFORMATION);

interactionService.promptMessageBoxAsync(
    "Message",
    "Message body",
    new PromptMessageBoxAsyncOptions().options(options));

Validation:

• RunAnalyzers=false dotnet run --project src/Aspire.Cli/Aspire.Cli.csproj -- sdk dump --format ci --output src/Aspire.Hosting/api/Aspire.Hosting.ats.txt
• dotnet test for the ATS scanner tests and TypeScript, Go, Python, Java, and Rust code generation test projects
• Compile-time validation for the edited tests/PolyglotAppHosts/Aspire.Hosting TypeScript, Python, Go, and Java AppHosts after aspire restore

Fixes # (issue)

Checklist

• Is this feature complete?
  • Yes. Ready to ship.
  • No. Follow-up changes expected.
• Are you including unit tests for the changes and scenario tests if relevant?
  • Yes
  • No
• Did you add public API?
  • Yes
    • If yes, did you have an API Review for it?
      • Yes
      • No
    • Did you add <remarks /> and <code /> elements on your triple slash comments?
      • Yes
      • No
  • No
• Does the change make any security assumptions or guarantees?
  • Yes
    • If yes, have you done a threat model and had a security review?
      • Yes
      • No
  • No