[Do not merge] Add support to create the QS observability file

[arnaucasau]

Closes #4804

This PR adds support to create the Quantum System observability page in our script. It also renames the old observability.mdx page to observability-runtime-rest.mdx

[arnaucasau]

Same file as the Runtime one, but with the correct package title, the QS endpoints, and without the region section.

Is the rest of the content correct?

[Eric-Arellano]

The only thing I'm not sure about is if it should be "Quantum System" or something like "the Quantum System API". I'll ask Raul

[raulotaolea]

I’m not 100% sure about this, but I think using Quantum System makes more sense. My reasoning is that, although the quantum system is a combination of hardware and software - and calling it a service might not seem entirely clear at first - we are actually commercializing it under a Hardware as a Service (HaaS) model, so it does make sense to consider it a service. And, as is typical for a service, it provides an API to use it. So referring to it as a Quantum System when we mean the quantum system as a whole - or the service it represents - makes sense. And using Quantum System API to refer to the API it provides is also clear and appropriate.

[abbycross]

For the title and first instances, let's follow the pattern in the rest of docs and use the full title with the word service, allowing for proper trademarking. And per Christine Vu, when we use "service" we should start with "the"; once we drop "service" we then also drop the "the".

• the IBM Quantum System service
• IBM Quantum System

That being said, I am concerned about using just IBM Quantum System or Quantum System on its own since the term doesn't clearly disambiguate from the QPUs that are not on-premises. Thoughts on how to make sure the distinction is very clear?

[arnaucasau]

Sounds good! Updated in d17d337 👍

[Eric-Arellano]

@abbycross should this be the full title Activity tracking events for the IBM Quantum System service?