Yes: more code to compile, more stuff to learn, more complexity. I gave like a 5-line-of-code example, I don’t understand why I’d want to replace that with a library.
I completely agree that libraries do have to prove their worth, and that you should not add them as though they are all zero-cost and zero weight - that is not true.
However I disagree in this case - if you have the problem that the library solves and it is ergonomic, then why not use it. Your "5-line-of-code example" doers not cover validation, and serialisation and casting concerns. As another commenter put it: "a properly constructed ID type has a non-trivial amount of code".
If you don't need more lines of code than that, then do your thing. But in the example that I looked at, I definitely would. As I said elsewhere in the thread, it is where all customer ids are strings, but only very specific strings are customer ids.
The larger point is that people who write c# and are reading this thread should know that these toolkits exist - that url links to other similar libraries and further reading. So they can can then make their own informed choices.