feat: use table view in pod check

[Elsie4ever]

update pod check display to use table view in detail level 1 and 2
0 will keep the same as before to summarize pod check in one line

level 0:

level 1:

level 2:

for pods does not have conditions property, it will look like:

---

This project has adopted the Microsoft Open Source Code of Conduct. For more information see the Code of Conduct FAQ or contact opencode@microsoft.com with any additional questions or comments.

Thank you for contributing to Azure IoT Operations tooling!

This checklist is used to make sure that common guidelines for a pull request are followed.

General Guidelines

Intent for Production

• It is expected that pull requests made to default or core branches such as dev or main are of production grade. Corollary to this, any merged contributions to these branches may be deployed in a public release at any given time. By checking this box, you agree and commit to the expected production quality of code.

Basic expectations

• If introducing new functionality or modified behavior, are they backed by unit and/or integration tests?
• In the same context as above are command names and their parameter definitions accurate? Do help docs have sufficient content?
• Have all the relevant unit and integration tests pass? i.e. pytest <project root> -vv. Please provide evidence in the form of a screenshot showing a succesful run of tests locally OR a link to a test pipeline that has been run against the change-set.
• Have linter checks passed using the .pylintrc and .flake8 rules? Look at the CI scripts for example usage.
• Have extraneous print or debug statements, commented out code-blocks or code-statements (if any) been removed from the surface area of changes?
• Have you made an entry in HISTORY.rst which concisely explains your user-facing feature or change?

Azure IoT Operations CLI maintainers reserve the right to enforce any of the outlined expectations.

A PR is considered ready for review when all basic expectations have been met (or do not apply).

[Elsie4ever]

IT runs

[Elsie4ever]

Talked with @c-ryan-k for some refactoring, will re open the pr once refactor done

[c-ryan-k]

Overall looks good, just a final few questions / nits to make sure we've got everything covered :)

[c-ryan-k]

I can't remember if this was always the case with this PR - but did this method display a "no pods" message? Or is that up to the individual CR check now that it's removed?

[Elsie4ever]

yeah now the no pod message will be under individual CR check, since we need the label to output the error message, meanwhile we don't want to pass the label down to evaluate_pod_health