Add Snowflake data quality operator examples to provider docs and system tests

[PrithviBadiga]

Adds Snowflake provider examples for:

• SnowflakeCheckOperator
• SnowflakeValueCheckOperator
• SnowflakeIntervalCheckOperator

Updates:

• providers/snowflake/tests/system/snowflake/example_snowflake.py
  • adds a small check table with ds and value
  • adds example tasks for check, value check, and interval check
• providers/snowflake/docs/operators/snowflake.rst
  • adds a Validate data section
  • includes the new examples via exampleinclude

Verification:

• python3 -m py_compile providers/snowflake/tests/system/snowflake/example_snowflake.py

This closes: #65098

Was generative AI tooling used to co-author this PR?

• Yes (Codex)

[boring-cyborg]

Congratulations on your first Pull Request and welcome to the Apache Airflow community! If you have any issues or are unsure about any anything please check our Contributors' Guide
Here are some useful points:

• Pay attention to the quality of your code (ruff, mypy and type annotations). Our prek-hooks will help you with that.
• In case of a new feature add useful documentation (in docstrings or in docs/ directory). Adding a new operator? Check this short guide Consider adding an example DAG that shows how users should use it.
• Consider using Breeze environment for testing locally, it's a heavy docker but it ships with a working Airflow and a lot of integrations.
• Be patient and persistent. It might take some time to get a review or get the final approval from Committers.
• Please follow ASF Code of Conduct for all communication including (but not limited to) comments on Pull Requests, Mailing list and Slack.
• Be sure to read the Airflow Coding style.
• Always keep your Pull Requests rebased, otherwise your build might fail due to changes not related to your commits.
  Apache Airflow is a community-driven project and together we are making it better 🚀.
  In case of doubts contact the developers at:
  Mailing List: dev@airflow.apache.org
  Slack: https://s.apache.org/airflow-slack

[SameerMesiah97]

CI needs to be triggered but this looks fine to me. I have left a few comments.

[PrithviBadiga]

Thanks for the review. I pushed an update that:

• adds brief comments to clarify the setup tasks in the example DAG
• makes the check-table setup flow clearer
• restructures the docs to use the operator class names as section headings

Please take another look.

[PrithviBadiga]

@SameerMesiah97 @potiuk Thanks for the review. The latest fix is pushed and the remaining checks appear to be awaiting maintainer approval for this fork PR. When you have a chance, could you approve/run them?

[potiuk]

@PrithviBadiga This PR has been converted to draft because it does not yet meet our Pull Request quality criteria.

Issues found:

• ❌ Unresolved review comments (3 threads): please walk through each unresolved review thread. Even if a suggestion looks incorrect or irrelevant — and some of them will be, especially any comments left by automated reviewers like GitHub Copilot — it is still the author's responsibility to respond: apply the fix, reply in-thread with a brief explanation of why the suggestion does not apply, or resolve the thread if the feedback is no longer relevant. Leaving threads unaddressed for weeks blocks the PR from moving forward.

What to do next:

• Walk through each unresolved review thread and respond as described above.
• Make sure static checks pass locally: prek run --from-ref main --stage pre-commit.
• Mark the PR as "Ready for review" when you're done.

Converting a PR to draft is not a rejection — it is an invitation to bring the PR up to the project's standards so that maintainer review time is spent productively. There is no rush — take your time and work at your own pace. We appreciate your contribution and are happy to wait for updates. If you have questions, feel free to ask on the Airflow Slack.

[potiuk]

Just to coment on that - please resolve the comments if you think they are resolved and undraft it

[potiuk]

I did it for you now so next time just resolve comments

[potiuk]

Quick follow-up to the triage comment above — one clarification on the "Unresolved review comments" item:

Once you believe a thread has been addressed — whether by pushing a fix, or by replying in-thread with an explanation of why the suggestion doesn't apply — please mark the thread as resolved yourself by clicking the "Resolve conversation" button at the bottom of each thread. Reviewers don't auto-close their own threads, so an addressed-but-unresolved thread reads as "still waiting on the author" and keeps the PR from moving forward. The author doing the resolve-click is the expected convention on this project.

[PrithviBadiga]

@potiuk Thanks for handling that and for the clarification. I’ll make sure to resolve the review threads myself next time after addressing them. Also, all checks are passing now. When you have a chance, could you merge this PR?

[SameerMesiah97]

@SameerMesiah97 @potiuk Thanks for the review. The latest fix is pushed and the remaining checks appear to be awaiting maintainer approval for this fork PR. When you have a chance, could you approve/run them?

I just had a look at it again and it looks fine to me. I have approved it but I cannot merge PRs.