Verify values of parametrized rzz gates

[yaelbh]

Summary

Fixes #2000.

This is only a draft. I forgot to write the tests before the code. So the current push contains the logic, but the tests will be added shortly.

Details and comments

@SamFerracin I have a question about the noise learner. I see that NoiseLearner._run calls validate_isa_circuits, like BasePrimitiveV2. I added in BasePrimitivesV2 a call to a new function, validate_rzz_pubs. But I'm not familiar enough with the noise learner to figure if a similar call should be added there too. I tried to add, but NoiseLearner._run receives circuits, unlike BasePrimitiveV2, which receives pubs. Should I make _run receive pubs and add the call to the new function?

[yaelbh]

Following #2035, we should also take into account parameter expressions.

[yaelbh]

A couple of comments:

1. The check for fixed angles will take place in both is_isa_circuit and is_rzz_pub. In is_isa_circuit - because not everyone has a full pub and can call is_rzz_pub - see the noise learner. In is_rzz_pub - because this way the function makes more sense and is more complete, this will be less confusing for developers, who may naturally expect fixed angles to be covered.
2. Parameter expressions are much more complicated, and will be computationally more expensive. An expression can consist of multiple parameters. We will have to evaluate each expression with all the parameter values for its parameters. At least for now this PR continues to skip parameter expressions.

[t-imamichi]

LGTM. But since I'm not an official approver, you need to ask someone else to review it too.

[kt474]

LGTM, can you add a release note?

[yaelbh]

@kt474 @wshanks It's ready for another review. Note that I added release notes.

[wshanks]

This looks good to me except for a minor formatting change on the release note. I put in two other minor suggestions.

[wshanks]

Looks good to me!