docs+code: rename tool labels everywhere

Sweep follow-up to 93e43fc. Display labels now consistent across docs,
landing pages, CLI output, code comments, docstrings, and test prose.
Five parallel surfaces touched:

- docs (EN + ES): README, USER-GUIDE, CLI-REFERENCE, and 11 internal
  design/planning docs
- landing pages: index + bookkeeper/revops/shopify-pet
- src: CLI module docstrings, _TOOL_DISPLAY dicts in cli_analyze.py
  and gui/components/_legacy.py, core module headers, every tool
  page's module docstring
- tests: class/method/module docstrings and section-header comments
- test-cases READMEs

Page slugs (1_Deduplicator etc.), tool_id strings (01_deduplicator
etc.), Python class names (TestDeduplicatorWorkflow, FeatureFlag.*),
URL paths, anchor IDs, CSS classes, and asset filenames were left
intact since they're code identifiers / structural references.

All 2033 tests pass.

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.7 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>

docs/POST-LAUNCH.md

@@ -144,7 +144,7 @@ Reading PLAN.md §3 + this doc together, the rough script:
 | **M1** (June) | Installers · demo · 3 landing pages · Gumroad live | Whether the funnel mechanically works. Numbers will be noisy; just look for one purchase. |
 | **M2** (July) | M1 + community posts in 3 niches + 1 SEO post | Which persona converts. Re-allocate effort to the highest-converting niche. |
 | **M3** (August) | M2 + landing-page changes from M2 review | Whether intent-rate moved on the change. Decide tools 06–08 go/no-go. |
-| **M4** (September) | M3 + first repeat-buyer signals | Whether the Pipeline Runner is producing retention as designed. |
+| **M4** (September) | M3 + first repeat-buyer signals | Whether Automated Workflows is producing retention as designed. |
 
 By end of M4, the data tells you whether the plan is producing
 $1k–3k/mo (BUSINESS.md §6 6-month target) — extrapolated from the