Added test for SolaraViz with required model parameters

[ShreyasN707]

• Summary

Adds a minimal regression test ensuring that SolaraViz correctly handles models with required constructor parameters when those parameters are supplied through model_params.

Related Issue : #2722

• Background

Users previously reported a ValueError: Missing required model parameter when using models with required parameters (e.g., MoneyModel(n, width, height)), even though the parameters were passed via model_params. This behavior has already been fixed in the current codebase.

• What This PR Does

This PR adds a minimal test to confirm the fix. No code changes were required.

• Test Added : tests/test_solara_required_params.py

Result:

 1 passed, 1 warning in 4.78s

[github-actions[bot]]

Performance benchmarks:

Model	Size	Init time [95% CI]	Run time [95% CI]
BoltzmannWealth	small	🔴 +4.7% [+3.7%, +5.7%]	🔵 -0.9% [-1.1%, -0.7%]
BoltzmannWealth	large	🔵 +4.9% [-12.3%, +24.7%]	🔴 +9.6% [+6.4%, +12.5%]
Schelling	small	🔵 +2.1% [+1.9%, +2.3%]	🔵 +0.1% [-0.1%, +0.3%]
Schelling	large	🔵 +4.0% [-13.9%, +24.7%]	🔴 +21.6% [+5.2%, +48.3%]
WolfSheep	small	🔴 +3.9% [+3.6%, +4.3%]	🔵 +0.8% [+0.6%, +0.9%]
WolfSheep	large	🔵 -11.8% [-36.5%, +6.3%]	🔵 +18.1% [-5.7%, +44.5%]
BoidFlockers	small	🔵 +2.1% [+1.7%, +2.7%]	🔵 +1.3% [+1.1%, +1.4%]
BoidFlockers	large	🔵 +1.8% [+1.4%, +2.4%]	🔵 +1.0% [+0.8%, +1.3%]

[ShreyasN707]

@EwoutH @quaquel Please review my PR.