[bazel] Re-examine use of `kwargs` in implementaion functions

Currently, many of the low-level transformation functions in the new rules use `kwargs` to accept optional arguments that one would expect to be provided in a rules context object. The reason for this is so that such functions can serve both as rule implemention functions and as utility functions called by other rules. It may be cleaner to explicitly specify all arguments rather than using the current `kwargs` scheme.

Start by locating the low-level transformation and rule implementation functions in the new rules, then trace how their kwargs are passed by rules and utility callers. Done means the argument-passing approach is explicitly defined and consistently supports both use cases without relying on the current kwargs scheme.

Written by the indexing model from the issue text.