[Bug]: Cannot define examples with different visibility of required fields

### Describe the bug

This definition is invalid even though example is valid for Read and Query:
```
@example(#{rw: "foo"})
model bar {
@visibility(Lifecycle.Read, Lifecycle.Query) ro: string;
rw: string;
}
```

Error: `error missing-property Property 'ro' is missing on type '{ rw: "foo" }' but required in 'bar' 1:10`

Expected behaviour: accept an example if it's acceptable in any of visibility settings, or allow explicit definition of visibility in example.

### Reproduction

[Playground Link](https://typespec.io/playground/?c=QGV4YW1wbGUoI3tydzogImZvbyJ9KQptb2RlbCBiYXIgewogIEB2aXNpYmlsaXR5KExpZmVjeWNsZS5SZWFkLCDKEFF1ZXJ5KSBybzogc3RyaW5nOwogIMRVyA59Cg%3D%3D&e=%40typespec%2Fopenapi3&options=%7B%7D)

### Checklist

- [x] Follow our [Code of Conduct](https://github.com/microsoft/typespec/blob/main/CODE_OF_CONDUCT.md)
- [x] Check that there isn't already an issue that request the same bug to avoid creating a duplicate.
- [x] Check that this is a concrete bug. For Q&A open a [GitHub Discussion](https://github.com/Microsoft/typespec/discussions).
- [x] The provided reproduction is a [minimal reproducible example](https://stackoverflow.com/help/minimal-reproducible-example) of the bug.