fix(general): update checks_metadata structure

[arielkru]

By submitting this pull request, I confirm that my contribution is made under the terms of the Apache 2.0 license.

Description

check_meatada.json should be a dict of resourceIds as keys, with each of the resourceIds containing a dict with check_ids as keys and the metadata as values.

Checklist:

• My code follows the style guidelines of this project
• I have performed a self-review of my own code
• I have commented my code, particularly in hard-to-understand areas
• I have made corresponding changes to the documentation
• I have added tests that prove my feature, policy, or fix is effective and works
• New and existing tests pass locally with my changes
• Any dependent changes have been merged and published in downstream modules

[marynaKK]

had 2 comments :) 🍒
Also, a Q as I do not fully understand - are the resource_id the same as the one we are changing in places like gha, azure pipelines, IR? if they are - they are different from the id that is used here. Is this an issue?

[arielkru]

had 2 comments :) 🍒 Also, a Q as I do not fully understand - are the resource_id the same as the one we are changing in places like gha, azure pipelines, IR? if they are - they are different from the id that is used here. Is this an issue?

@marynaKK good q, it shouldn't be an issue because the resourceId here doesnt change the resourceIds in the reports, it just fits the way we expect resource keys to appear in the checks_metadata.json file.
So for example an azure_pipelines resource is saved under the key: /azure-pipelines.yaml:jobs[0](FailTag) and that's ok