docs: add new configuration for tenant-filter for jobWorkers and the Camunda Spring Client code

[Ben-Sheppard]

Description

closes camunda/camunda#45327

With camunda/camunda#45287 we have introduced a new method of configuring job workers such that you can configure a job worker to poll for (or stream) jobs based on the tenants assigned to the authenticated principle making the request.

I wasn't sure however we have two places describing Job Workers, one page in the Using Camunda section, and one in the APIs & Tools, I would like input on this.

When should this change go live?

• This is a bug fix, security concern, or something that needs urgent release support. (add bug or support label)
• This is already available but undocumented and should be released within a week. (add available & undocumented label)
• This is on a specific schedule and the assignee will coordinate a release with the Documentation team. (create draft PR and/or add hold label)
• This is part of a scheduled alpha or minor. (add alpha or minor label)
• There is no urgency with this change (add low prio label)

PR Checklist

• The commit history of this PR is cleaned up, using {type}(scope): {description} commit message(s)

• My changes are for an upcoming minor release and are in the /docs directory (version 8.9).
• My changes are for an already released minor and are in a /versioned_docs directory.

• I added a DRI, team, or delegate as a reviewer for technical accuracy and grammar/style:
  • Engineering team review
  • Technical writer review via @camunda/tech-writers unless working with an embedded writer.

[github-actions]

👋 🤖 🤔 Hello, @Ben-Sheppard! Did you make your changes in all the right places?

These files were changed only in docs/. You might want to duplicate these changes in versioned_docs/version-8.8/.

• docs/apis-tools/camunda-spring-boot-starter/configuration.md
• docs/apis-tools/java-client/job-worker.md

You may have done this intentionally, but we wanted to point it out in case you didn't. You can read more about the versioning within our docs in our documentation guidelines.

[alexronquillo]

@Ben-Sheppard Thanks for the PR!

Overall, this looks good to me, so I've approved. I did, however, leave a couple of small, non-blocking suggestions.