[#1957] Change claim-status service tag to virtual-agent

[alexperson-tw]

Note: Delete the description statements, complete each step. None are optional, but can be justified as to why they cannot be completed as written. Provide known gaps to testing that may raise the risk of merging to production.

Summary

• This work is behind a feature toggle (flipper): YES/NO
• No
• (Summarize the changes that have been made to the platform)
• We changed the service tag of our controller from claim-status to virtual-agent.
• (If bug, how to reproduce)
• (What is the solution, why is this the solution?)
• We are working to migrate from Sentry to Datadog and along the way we saw that this service tag should be set to virtual-agent, a service our team manages, instead of claim-status, a service managed by another team.
• (Which team do you work for, does your team own the maintenance of this component?)
• I work with the Virtual Agent Chatbot team and we own the maintenance of this component.
• (If introducing a flipper, what is the success criteria being targeted?)

Related issue(s)

• Link to ticket created in va.gov-team repo OR screenshot of Jira ticket if your team uses Jira
• https://github.com/orgs/department-of-veterans-affairs/projects/1468/views/3?pane=issue&itemId=84546473&issue=department-of-veterans-affairs%7Cva-virtual-agent%7C1957
• Link to previous change of the code/bug (if applicable)
• Link to epic if not included in ticket

Testing done

• New code is covered by unit tests
• Describe what the old behavior was prior to the change
• Our controller was sending logs to the wrong service in Datadog.
• Describe the steps required to verify your changes are working as expected. Exclusively stating 'Specs run' is NOT acceptable as appropriate testing
• If this work is behind a flipper:
  • Tests need to be written for both the flipper on and flipper off scenarios. Docs.
  • What is the testing plan for rolling out the feature?

Screenshots

Note: Optional

What areas of the site does it impact?

(Describe what parts of the site are impacted andifcode touched other areas)
This impacts which Datadog service the logs of our controller are sent to.

Acceptance criteria

• I fixed|updated|added unit tests and integration tests for each feature (if applicable).
• No error nor warning in the console.
• Events are being sent to the appropriate logging solution
• Documentation has been updated (link to documentation)
• No sensitive information (i.e. PII/credentials/internal URLs/etc.) is captured in logging, hardcoded, or specs
• Feature/bug has a monitor built into Datadog (if applicable)
• If app impacted requires authentication, did you login to a local build and verify all authenticated routes work as expected
• I added a screenshot of the developed feature

Requested Feedback

(OPTIONAL)What should the reviewers know in addition to the above. Is there anything specific you wish the reviewer to assist with. Do you have any concerns with this PR, why?