[Breaking Change] Some validation errors are useless at a glance and often require separate tools to understand

Many of our validation errors are pretty self-explanatory, but some like below are confusing at best and useless at a glance at worst:


1. Because there are two different base version comparisons, when validation mentions "old" or "new" - which version? Validations with links are much more helpful.
2. Why do only some validation errors have links? Seems they all could / should.
3. Barring links for all validations, can you at least tell us what model? Properties like `id` are prolific so a validation error mentioning only "id" isn't useful.

Ideally, swagger authors are able to determine what they need to fix (or otherwise get an exemption on / explain) but I look at numerous swagger diffs a day and I can't really make heads or tails of these issues without having to use the OpenAPI Diff tool which is slow and often fails.

Start by examining the validation output shown in the issue and comparing it with the OpenAPI Diff tool’s more informative results for Swagger diffs. Done means validation errors consistently identify the relevant base-version comparison, link to useful context where possible, and name the model when properties such as id are ambiguous.

Written by the indexing model from the issue text.