Add execution_requirements to ctx.actions.write

[fmeum]

Since Bazel's only FileWriteStrategy doesn't execute a spawn, this can currently only affect the path mapping behavior of the action when supplying Args as content. This will make it possible to opt C++ rules into path mapping without any command line flags beyond --experimental_output_paths=strip in future PRs.

Work towards #27732
Work towards #27591

[fmeum]

@hvadehra I would have assigned Ivo for review in the past - who would be the right person for rules API changes nowadays?

[gemini-code-assist]

Code Review

This pull request adds an execution_requirements parameter to ctx.actions.write. This allows passing execution information, which for now is mainly used to enable path mapping for actions that write parameter files (Args content). The changes to the Starlark API and the action factory implementation look correct and are accompanied by a new test. I've pointed out a potential issue where ParameterFileWriteAction doesn't persist all execution requirements, which could be surprising for users inspecting the action.

[hvadehra]

@hvadehra I would have assigned Ivo for review in the past - who would be the right person for rules API changes nowadays?

bazel/site/en/contribute/maintainers-guide.md

Lines 189 to 190 in cc1e0a6

	* [`team-Rules-API`](https://github.com/bazelbuild/bazel/labels/team-Rules-API){: .external}: API for writing rules/aspects: providers, runfiles, actions, artifacts
	* Contact: [pzembrod](https://github.com/pzembrod){: .external}

[katre]

Nice!

[fmeum]

@bazel-io fork 9.0.0

[pzembrod]

I realize that this is our existing standard doc for execution_requirements; however, it is a bit confusing to me, given that tags in https://bazel.build/reference/be/common-definitions#common.tags is described as list of string, whereas here we have a dict. Do we have any better documentation for execution_requirements that we could point to? Or that we could write?