Search: Adding some missing descriptions to the 2016-09-01 spec

[brjohnstmsft]

NOTE: This Swagger spec fails validation with the current version of the linter. This is a known issue: #1085

We are trying to ship an incremental bugfix/feature update to our .NET SDK. We do not have the bandwidth right now to do a full pass over this Swagger spec, so please keep that in mind as you review it.

FYI @chaosrealm @Yahnoosh @vishrutshah

---

This checklist is used to make sure that common issues in a pull request are addressed. This will expedite the process of getting your pull request merged and avoid extra work on your part to fix issues discovered during the review process.

PR information

• The title of the PR is clear and informative.
• There are a small number of commits, each of which have an informative message. This means that previously merged commits do not appear in the history of the PR. For information on cleaning up the commits in your pull request, see this page.
• Except for special cases involving multiple contributors, the PR is started from a fork of the main repository, not a branch.
• If applicable, the PR references the bug/issue that it fixes.
• Swagger files are correctly named (e.g. the api-version in the path should match the api-version in the spec).

Quality of Swagger

• I have read the contribution guidelines.
• My spec meets the review criteria:
  • The spec conforms to the Swagger 2.0 specification.
  • The spec follows the guidelines described in the Swagger checklist document.
  • Validation tools were run on swagger spec(s) and have all been fixed in this PR.

[anudeepsharma]

You can also put regex rules here with min/max length

[anudeepsharma]

example - https://github.com/Azure/azure-rest-api-specs/blob/master/arm-batch/2017-01-01/swagger/BatchManagement.json#L64

[brjohnstmsft]

@anudeepsharma I have some (IMO) well-grounded objections to regex constraints. Rather than repeat them, I'll direct you to this discussion on an earlier PR.

Regarding min/max constraints, I believe they are valuable for documentation purposes where applicable. These limits are documented in the (hand written) REST API reference, which we now link to from the Swagger spec. However, I would still refrain from adding them to the Swagger until AutoRest supports disabling client-side validation.

[anudeepsharma]

Waiting for regex and min/max length. In case you are not doing, let me know, I will merge the PR. Changes look fine to me otherwise.

Also - https://travis-ci.org/Azure/azure-rest-api-specs/jobs/216953241 is failing. In case you can make build better, please do it (don't make breaking changes though).

[Yahnoosh]

[brjohnstmsft]

@anudeepsharma Regarding the Travis CI build failing, please see my comment at the top of this PR:

NOTE: This Swagger spec fails validation with the current version of the linter. This is a known issue: #1085

[brjohnstmsft]

@anudeepsharma Opened an issue on AutoRest to track disabling client-side validation: Azure/autorest#2100

[anudeepsharma]

LGTM

[AutorestCI]

No modification for Ruby

[AutorestCI]

No modification for NodeJS

[AutorestCI]

No modification for Python