Improve consistency and documentation on error handling in in UDFs

### Is your feature request related to a problem or challenge?

When writing a new UDF, a developer needs to decide how to perform error management in functions that return `Result`, such as `return_type` and `invoke`. Looking at the existing codebase it is not obvious what are the error management best practices

# Errors in return type
- Regexp like uses an `plan_err` data types of args do not match the expected types https://github.com/apache/datafusion/blob/77311a5896272c7ed252d8cd53d48ec6ea7c0ccf/datafusion/functions/src/regex/regexplike.rs#L74 . Is this check redundant?

- Except expects two arguments but doesn't check the length, just the type https://github.com/apache/datafusion/blob/77311a5896272c7ed252d8cd53d48ec6ea7c0ccf/datafusion/functions-array/src/except.rs#L55.

# Errors in invoke

In the resize function, there is a check on argument lengths in invoke which is not present in the `return_type` function
https://github.com/apache/datafusion/blob/77311a5896272c7ed252d8cd53d48ec6ea7c0ccf/datafusion/functions-array/src/resize.rs#L27

The same function also returns `exec_err`, and `internal_datafusion_err`

### Describe the solution you'd like

As a developers of custom UDF I would like to know:
- what errors I need to check for and what are already checked by the planner (number of arguments?)
- what type of errors need to be raised in which conditions

### Describe alternatives you've considered

_No response_

### Additional context

_No response_

まず、datafusion/functions/src/regex/regexplike.rs と datafusion/functions-array/src/except.rs および resize.rs の return_type と invoke を比較し、引数のチェックと報告されるエラーのバリアントに注目してください。planner の検証がこれらの関数とどのように関係するかを確認してください。期待されるチェックとエラー型を文書化し、一貫性に関する変更をテストでカバーすれば完了です。

索引モデルが issue の本文から書いたものです。