feat: backport Opus 4.7 + adaptive thinking, remove scan tools, add --help to scripts

Backport upstream Shannon PRs #325, #327, #328:

- Update large model default to claude-opus-4-7, add adaptive thinking
  configuration (auto-enabled on Opus 4.6/4.7, opt-out via
  CLAUDE_ADAPTIVE_THINKING=false), filter thinking blocks from message
  content, bump claude-agent-sdk to ^0.2.114
- Remove unused scan tools (nmap, subfinder, whatweb, schemathesis) from
  Dockerfile, prompts, and docs; remove dead 'tool' error type from
  PentestErrorType; redact URLs in preflight info logs
- Add --help flag to save-deliverable and generate-totp CLI scripts

Co-Authored-By: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>

apps/worker/prompts/report-executive.txt

@@ -12,7 +12,7 @@ Technical leadership (CTOs, CISOs, Engineering VPs) who need both technical accu
 The orchestrator has already concatenated all specialist reports into `comprehensive_security_assessment_report.md`. 
 Your task is to:
 1. Read this existing concatenated report
-2. Add Executive Summary (vulnerability overview) and Network Reconnaissance (security-relevant scan findings) sections at the top
+2. Add an Executive Summary (vulnerability overview) at the top
 3. Clean up ALL exploitation evidence sections by removing hallucinated content
 4. Save the modified version back to the same file
 
@@ -72,19 +72,10 @@ MODIFY the existing file `.shannon/deliverables/comprehensive_security_assessmen
 **Server-Side Request Forgery (SSRF) Vulnerabilities:**
 {Check for "SSRF Exploitation Evidence" section. Include actually exploited vulnerabilities and those blocked by security controls. Exclude theoretical vulnerabilities requiring internal network access. If vulnerabilities exist, summarize their impact and severity. If section is missing or empty, state: "No SSRF vulnerabilities were found."}
 
-## Network Reconnaissance
-{Extract security-relevant findings from automated scanning tools:
-- Open ports and exposed services from nmap
-- Subdomain discoveries from subfinder that could expand attack surface
-- Security headers or misconfigurations detected by whatweb
-- Any other security-relevant findings from the automated tools
-SKIP stack details - technical leaders know their infrastructure}
-
 2. KEEPING the existing exploitation evidence sections but CLEANING them according to the rules below
 
 3. The final structure should be:
    - Executive Summary (new)
-   - Network Reconnaissance (new)
    - All existing exploitation evidence sections (cleaned)
 
 IMPORTANT: Do NOT reorder the existing exploitation evidence sections. Maintain the exact order they appear in the concatenated report. Only remove sections that do not match the defined criteria above.
@@ -93,15 +84,12 @@ IMPORTANT: Do NOT reorder the existing exploitation evidence sections. Maintain
 
 <instructions>
 1. Read the pre_recon and recon deliverable files to gather security-relevant information:
-   - Focus on findings from automated tools (nmap, subfinder, whatweb) that indicate security risks
-   - Note exposed services, open ports, subdomains, security misconfigurations
    - Skip basic information such as technology stack information (the team knows their own stack)
    - Use technical leadership tone - precise but concise
    - Use the current date for the assessment date
 
-2. Create the Executive Summary and Network Reconnaissance content:
+2. Create the Executive Summary content:
    - Executive Summary: Technical overview with actionable findings for engineering leaders
-   - Network Reconnaissance: Focus on security-relevant discoveries from automated scans
 
 3. Clean the exploitation evidence sections from `.shannon/deliverables/comprehensive_security_assessment_report.md` by applying these rules:
    - KEEP these specific section headings: