SC prototype | Add MST info to intro

[Mottie]

Are you removing, renaming or moving a folder in this PR?

• No, I'm not changing any folders (skip to Summary and delete the rest of this section)
• Yes, I'm removing, renaming or moving a folder

Did you change site-wide styles, platform utilities or other infrastructure?

• No
• Yes, and I used the proxy-rewrite steps to test the injected header scenario

Summary

• (Summarize the changes that have been made to the platform)

  Adding military sexual trauma (MST) information to the Supplemental Claim

• (If bug, how to reproduce)
• (What is the solution, why is this the solution)
• (Which team do you work for, does your team own the maintenance of this component?)
• (If using a flipper, what is the end date of the flipper being required/success criteria being targeted)

Related issue(s)

• SC | update prototype to match design va.gov-team#90568
• Design

Testing done

• Describe what the old behavior was prior to the change
• Describe the steps required to verify your changes are working as expected
• Describe the tests completed and the results

  No unit or e2e tests for this prototype

• _Exclusively stating 'Specs and automated tests passing' is NOT acceptable as appropriate testing
• Optionally, provide a link to your test plan and test execution records

Screenshots

Note: This field is mandatory for UI changes (non-component work should NOT have screenshots).

	Before	After
Intro

What areas of the site does it impact?

Supplemental Claim prototype

Acceptance criteria

Quality Assurance & Testing

• I fixed|updated|added unit tests and integration tests for each feature (if applicable).
• No sensitive information (i.e. PII/credentials/internal URLs/etc.) is captured in logging, hardcoded, or specs
• Linting warnings have been addressed
• Documentation has been updated (link to documentation *if necessary)
• Screenshot of the developed feature is added
• Accessibility testing has been performed

Error Handling

• Browser console contains no warnings or errors.
• Events are being sent to the appropriate logging solution
• Feature/bug has a monitor built into Datadog or Grafana (if applicable)

Authentication

• Did you login to a local build and verify all authenticated routes work as expected with a test user

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?

[shaunburdick]

LGTM.