[red-knot] Add `Type.definition` method (#17153)
## Summary
This is a follow up to the goto type definition PR. Specifically, that
we want to avoid exposing too many semantic model internals publicly.
I want to get some feedback on the approach taken. I think it goes into
the right direction but I'm not super happy with it.
The basic idea is that we add a `Type::definition` method which does the
"goto type definition". The parts that I think make it awkward:
* We can't directly return `Definition` because we don't create a
`Definition` for modules (but we could?). Although I think it makes
sense to possibly have a more public wrapper type anyway?
* It doesn't handle unions and intersections. Mainly because not all
elements in an intersection may have a definition and we only want to
show a navigation target for intersections if there's only a single
positive element (besides maybe `Unknown`).
An alternative design or an addition to this design is to introduce a
`SemanticAnalysis(Db)` struct that has methods like
`type_definition(&self, type)` which explicitly exposes the methods we
want. I don't feel comfortable design this API yet because it's unclear
how fine granular it has to be (and if it is very fine granular,
directly using `Type` might be better after all)
## Test Plan
`cargo test`
