feat(api): add retract_axis to OT-2 and FLEX hardware-control api

[ahiuchingau]

Addresses hardware-control side of RQA-997
Protocol engine & app changes will follow in #13006

Overview

Adds per-axis retraction feature to hardware controller API for OT2 & Flex

Test Plan

Test on OT2 & Flex and make sure the axes retract correctly. Also make sure mount retraction remains unchanged.

Changelog

• added retract_axis HC api methods and updated mount retraction to delegate to the new method

Review requests

Risk assessment

Low

[codecov]

Codecov Report

Merging #13001 (1f77633) into edge (9d0c60f) will increase coverage by 0.00%.
The diff coverage is n/a.

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##             edge   #13001      +/-   ##
==========================================
  Coverage   72.28%   72.28%              
==========================================
  Files        2373     1552     -821     
  Lines       65064    50630   -14434     
  Branches     7289     3256    -4033     
==========================================
- Hits        47032    36600   -10432     
+ Misses      16328    13548    -2780     
+ Partials     1704      482    -1222     

Flag	Coverage Δ
app	43.69% <ø> (-27.58%)	⬇️
components	64.42% <ø> (ø)
g-code-testing	96.44% <ø> (ø)
labware-library	49.61% <ø> (ø)
notify-server	89.13% <ø> (ø)
protocol-designer	44.06% <ø> (ø)
step-generation	84.28% <ø> (ø)

Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more.

Impacted Files	Coverage Δ
api/src/opentrons/hardware_control/api.py	82.47% <ø> (-0.04%)	⬇️
api/src/opentrons/hardware_control/ot3api.py	80.15% <ø> (ø)

... and 823 files with indirect coverage changes

[sfoster1]

Looks good to me, typo tho

[sfoster1]

Suggested change

	await self.restract_axis(OT3Axis.by_mount(mount))
	await self.retract_axis(OT3Axis.by_mount(mount))

[sanni-t]

Tested this along with #13006 (without app changes) on an OT3 and confirmed that axis retraction works. The only issue observed was that motion planning doesn't seem to know that the axis is already at its highest and doesn't need to move to a different point to clear all labware on deck. Pretty sure that's on the engine so will confirm and get back to you so we can merge this PR in.

[sanni-t]

The only issue observed was that motion planning doesn't seem to know that the axis is already at its highest and doesn't need to move to a different point to clear all labware on deck. Pretty sure that's on the engine so will confirm and get back to you so we can merge this PR in.

Alright, verified that fixing this issue required only a protocol engine change.
So @andySigler or @ahiuchingau you can undraft this PR and merge in edge. I'll rebase my branch on top of this one.