Update strict docstring in model_validate method.

[LukeTonin]

Change Summary

The docstring of the model_validate method indicates that strict is used to determine "Whether to raise an exception on invalid fields.".

This appears to be incorrect as errors with strict == False still lead to an exception being raised. Instead, it seems like strict is used to determine whether types are enforced strictly. This description of strict is the one used in all other versions of the model_validate_* methods and appears to be correct as can be seen in the following example:

from datetime import datetime
from typing import Tuple

from pydantic import BaseModel


class Delivery(BaseModel):
    timestamp: datetime
    dimensions: Tuple[int, int]

obj = {
    "timestamp": "2020-01-02T03:04:05Z",
    "dimensions": ["10", "20"],
}

Delivery.model_validate(obj=obj, strict=True) # Raises ValidationError
Delivery.model_validate(obj=obj, strict=False) # Succeeds

obj = {
    "timestamp": "2020-0105Z", # invalid datetime
    "dimensions": ["10", "20"],
}
Delivery.model_validate(obj=obj, strict=False) # Raises ValidationError

This change corrects the docstring associated with the strict parameter and aligns it with all the other model_validate_* docstrings.

Related issue number

No issue raised since change is trivial.

Checklist

• The pull request title is a good summary of the changes - it will be used in the changelog
• Unit tests for the changes exist / Not Applicable
• Tests pass on CI
• Documentation reflects the changes where applicable
• My PR is ready to review, please add a comment including the phrase "please review" to assign reviewers

Selected Reviewer: @sydney-runkle

[codspeed-hq]

CodSpeed Performance Report

Merging #8223 will not alter performance

_{Comparing LukeTonin:standardise-strict-in-docstrings (980131a) with main (afa3d4c)}

Summary

✅ 10 untouched benchmarks

[LukeTonin]

please review

[sydney-runkle]

Looks great @LukeTonin, thanks for your help :)