spec(XLS-65): Update VaultDeposit failure conditions and state changes

[Tapanito]

Syncs the VaultDeposit spec section with the current implementation in src/libxrpl/tx/transactors/vault/VaultDeposit.cpp.

Data Verification (3.5.2.1) — was _None._, now has two items:

• VaultID = 0 (temMALFORMED)
• Amount ≤ 0 (temBAD_AMOUNT)

Protocol-Level Failures (3.5.2.2) — extended from 7 to 13 items:

• Private vault auth: split into two sub-cases (no domain configured → tecNO_AUTH; not a valid domain member → tecNO_AUTH)
• Added: vault shares locked for depositor (tecLOCKED)
• Added: depositor lacks required authorized holding for MPT (tecNO_AUTH)
• Added: amount rounds to zero at vault scale (tecPRECISION_LOSS)
• Added: amount rounds to zero at depositor trust line scale / IOU (tecPRECISION_LOSS)
• Added: computed share amount is zero (tecPRECISION_LOSS)
• Added: arithmetic overflow in share calculation (tecPATH_DRY)
• Added error codes to all items

State Changes (3.5.3) — corrected:

• Use $\Delta_{asset}$ throughout (actual transferred amount may be less than requested Amount due to IOU scale rounding)
• Note on rounding added

[tyalymov]

Same question as in #549: in 3.5.2.2 the order of the failure conditions doesn't match the evaluation order in preclaim/doApply. Two spots:

private-domain auth is listed before the freeze/lock checks, but the code checks freeze/lock first;
tecINSUFFICIENT_FUNDS is listed before the vault-scale tecPRECISION_LOSS, but the code checks precision first.
Is the numbered list meant to be the evaluation order? If so, can we reorder to match?

[Tapanito]

Confirmed against VaultDeposit.cpp — same answer as #549, the list is meant to be evaluation order. Two fixes: (1) moved the private-domain auth check to after the MPT-transferability/freeze/shares-locked checks; (2) moved the vault-scale tecPRECISION_LOSS check before tecINSUFFICIENT_FUNDS — the code rounds and rejects a zero amount before it ever checks the depositor's balance.