feat: accept vkey from config

[hadjiszs]

Context

op-succinct upgrades need a new release of the aggkit prover for nothing more than updating the vkeys.

The suggestion is to take optionally those vkey from config so that no aggkit prover release / image is needed whenever we upgrade op-succinct.

Solution

Implement a small cli command to output the config values to use for the new upgrade op-succinct elfs:

cargo run -p aggkit-prover -- op-succinct-vkey --elf-dir /path/to/elf/directory/

It outputs:

[aggchain-proof-service.op-succinct]
aggregation-vkey = "0x..."
range-vkey-commitment = "0x..."
# aggregation on-chain vkey hash (bytes32): 0x...

Then, only config update is needed for aggkit-prover instead of new release

[claude]

Claude Code Review

This repository is configured for manual code reviews. Comment @claude review to trigger a review and subscribe this PR to future pushes, or @claude review once for a one-time review.

_{Tip: disable this comment in your organization's Code Review settings.}

[chatgpt-codex-connector]

💡 Codex Review

Here are some automated review suggestions for this pull request.

Reviewed commit: 6cdb82895d

ℹ️ About Codex in GitHub

Your team has set up Codex to review pull requests in this repo. Reviews are triggered when you

• Open a pull request for review
• Mark a draft as ready
• Comment "@codex review".

If Codex has suggestions, it will comment; otherwise it will react with 👍.

Codex can also answer questions or update the PR. Try commenting "@codex address that feedback".

[chatgpt-codex-connector]

Reject conflicting vkey override installs

When the same process constructs more than one service with different op-succinct override config, OnceLock::set returns Err here but the error is discarded, so the second service keeps using the first service's vkey/commitment and can reject otherwise-valid proofs or fail against the second chain's on-chain config. This also violates /workspace/provers/AGENTS.md guidance to never silently discard errors with let _ = on fallible operations; please either error on conflicting repeats or verify the existing value matches the requested override.

Useful? React with 👍 / 👎.