Capabilities tests should be stricter

[bm1549]

Motivation

Some products have added capabilities that were not registered on our backend, which means that they are not usable
Some languages allow higher than 64-bit capabilities, which could cause problems down the line

Changes

• Tests that capabilities are at most 64 bits
• Tests that all capabilities received are part of the list maintained in system tests (to be added later on - a check against capabilities.go)
• Exhaustive check for all capabilities provided by default across different libraries
• Adds typing to LibraryVersion to make it clearer how it should be used
• Adds missing Capabilities (as seen in dd-trace-java)

Workflow

1. ⚠️ Create your PR as draft ⚠️
2. Work on you PR until the CI passes (if something not related to your task is failing, you can ignore it)
3. Mark it as ready for review
   • Test logic is modified? -> Get a review from RFC owner. We're working on refining the codeowners file quickly.
   • Framework is modified, or non obvious usage of it -> get a review from R&P team

🚀 Once your PR is reviewed, you can merge it!

🛟 #apm-shared-testing 🛟

Reviewer checklist

• If PR title starts with [<language>], double-check that only <language> is impacted by the change
• No system-tests internal is modified. Otherwise, I have the approval from R&P team
• CI is green, or failing jobs are not related to this change (and you are 100% sure about this statement)
• A docker base image is modified?
  • the relevant build-XXX-image label is present
• A scenario is added (or removed)?
  • Get a review from R&P team