[ENH] Clarify and Standardize Intent Configuration in State Machine

[lakhoune]

Currently, there are two ways to configure intents for the bot: through the label of a leadsTo edge or within the incoming message element. This dual approach to intent configuration has raised concerns regarding clarity and consistency in our state machine.

Key Points:

1. Intent Keywords as Guards: The intent keywords seem to function more as guards, determining when the state machine can transition to the next state. This aligns with how guards are defined on the edges in a typical state machine.

2. Ambiguity and Confusion: Having two distinct ways to configure intents has introduced ambiguity. For instance, it's possible to have an incomingMessage element with keyword A but an incoming edge labeled as B. This situation creates significant confusion and needs resolution.

3. Incoming Messages as States: There is an increasing perception that incoming messages are akin to states themselves, as referenced in issue Use state labels #232. To better reflect this shift, it is suggested that we rename them to "states." with state labels as mentioned in Use state labels #232