Search Kit - Add a status-check to validate SearchDisplays

[totten]

Overview

Saved-searches and search-displays can be complicated objects -- with references to various fields, entities, flags. Over time, as a system evolves, these values could get out of sync. If that happens... how do you know?

Before

The only way to validate a search is to open it.

After

The system status-check will warn if any search-displays appear to have problems. For example:

Comments

This is inspired by #31632 (though not strictly dependent) -- under one draft of #31632, there would be a de-facto change in schema. Items of type "DB Entity" would no longer export a field named _row (row-number). Any downstream Displays that consume this field would therefore lose access. The sysadmin should review affected Display and decide what to do (drop the reference to _row... or replace it with id... or something else...).

The current validation succeeds at detecting when there's a stale _row reference, but...

It's generally a pretty naive validation. I believe I'm getting some false-negatives with stock data. @colemanw, do you see how we make a more realistic validation?

[civibot]

🤖 Thank you for contributing to CiviCRM! ❤️ We will need to test and review this PR. 👷

Introduction for new contributors...

• If this is your first PR, an admin will greenlight automated testing with the command ok to test or add to whitelist.
• A series of tests will automatically run. You can see the results at the bottom of this page (if there are any problems, it will include a link to see what went wrong).
• A demo site will be built where anyone can try out a version of CiviCRM that includes your changes.
• If this process needs to be repeated, an admin will issue the command test this please to rerun tests and build a new demo site.
• Before this PR can be merged, it needs to be reviewed. Please keep in mind that reviewers are volunteers, and their response time can vary from a few hours to a few weeks depending on their availability and their knowledge of this particular part of CiviCRM.
• A great way to speed up this process is to "trade reviews" with someone - find an open PR that you feel able to review, and leave a comment like "I'm reviewing this now, could you please review mine?" (include a link to yours). You don't have to wait for a response to get started (and you don't have to stop at one!) the more you review, the faster this process goes for everyone 😄
• To ensure that you are credited properly in the final release notes, please add yourself to contributor-key.yml
• For more information about contributing, see CONTRIBUTING.md.

Quick links for reviewers...

• ➡️ PR Demo site (can be rebuilt with the command test this please).
• 📖 Review standards
• 🗒️ Review template (brief or verbose)

➡️ Online demo of this PR 🔗

[colemanw]

@totten real validation is tricky and probably would require a dry-run of the search. I haven't looked closely but the AbstractRunAction has some helper functions that could be useful in mocking up the run action for validation & error-checking purposes.