UIOR-1516: Add scope to ViewCustomFieldsRecord and EditCustomFieldsRecord

[elsenhans]

https://folio-org.atlassian.net/browse/UIOR-1516
https://folio-org.atlassian.net/browse/UIOR-1501

Purpose

Custom fields accordion name is not updated in the orders and PO lines

Approach

Add missing scope to ViewCustomFieldsRecord and EditCustomFieldsRecord

Screenshots

Pre-Merge Checklist

Before merging this PR, please go through the following list and take appropriate actions.

• I've added appropriate record to the CHANGELOG.md
• Does this PR meet or exceed the expected quality standards?
  • Code coverage on new code is 80% or greater
  • Duplications on new code is 3% or less
  • There are no major code smells or security issues
• Does this introduce breaking changes?
  • If any API-related changes - okapi interfaces and permissions are reviewed/changed correspondingly
  • There are no breaking changes in this PR.

If there are breaking changes, please STOP and consider the following:

• What other modules will these changes impact?
• Do JIRAs exist to update the impacted modules?
  • If not, please create them
  • Do they contain the appropriate level of detail? Which endpoints/schemas changed, etc.
  • Do they have all they appropriate links to blocked/related issues?
• Are the JIRAs under active development?
  • If not, contact the project's PO and make sure they're aware of the urgency.
• Do PRs exist for these changes?
  • If so, have they been approved?

Ideally all of the PRs involved in breaking changes would be merged in the same day to avoid breaking the folio-testing environment. Communication is paramount if that is to be achieved, especially as the number of intermodule and inter-team dependencies increase.

While it's helpful for reviewers to help identify potential problems, ensuring that it's safe to merge is ultimately the responsibility of the PR assignee.

[github-actions]

Jest Unit Test Results

    1 files  ±0    295 suites  ±0   7m 29s ⏱️ -14s
1 002 tests ±0    994 ✅ ±0  8 💤 ±0  0 ❌ ±0 
1 010 runs  ±0  1 002 ✅ ±0  8 💤 ±0  0 ❌ ±0 

Results for commit e51e3c2. ± Comparison against base commit 8fd4ee8.

♻️ This comment has been updated with latest results.

[sonarqubecloud]

Quality Gate passed

Issues
0 New issues
0 Accepted issues

Measures
0 Security Hotspots
0.0% Coverage on New Code
0.0% Duplication on New Code

See analysis details on SonarQube Cloud