Only reason this is marked for the Engine WG to review is due to the code path.
I feel from the discussion in the issue as this has had input from @JamesWTruher & the comments from @iSazonov we should be fine with not needing further input from across the working group for this PR, especially as we already have lots of other work that desperately needs reviewing.

Only other thing I am thinking should we have a test/ update this test for when you have
alias -> alias -> actual command and it should show the full path from first alias to end command in the DisplayName.
Will think on this & I think will add another test in a future PR for this particular test case.

Originally posted by @kilasuit in #25763 (comment)