proposal: add `vitest/prefer-for` rule

[aryaemami59]

Overview

• Add a rule that enforces the usage of test.for and describe.for.
• Enable existing rules to work with test.for syntax.

[veritem]

a pr is always welcome

[Vinccool96]

I would suggest for it to be named vitest/consistent-each-for to be consistent with the naming conventions already established (vitest/consistent-test-it already exists). It would also help with know that we can define a different preference for describe, test, and it.