feat(sdk-core): depositToVault with getVaultConfig and Concrete BTC support

[venkateshv1266]

Summary

• Add VaultProvider enum (Morpho, ConcreteBtccx) and named result types ConcreteDepositResult / MorphoDepositResult; update DepositResult union to use them
• Add getVaultConfig to DefiVault and IDefiVault, proxying GET /api/defi-service/v1/vaults/:id
• Add protocol dispatch in depositToVault: routes ConcreteBtccx → depositToConcreteVault, Morpho → depositToMorphoVault, else throws unsupported provider error
• depositToConcreteVault: single sendMany with type: 'defi-deposit' and defiParams; no recipients (WP resolves escrow destination server-side)
• Add defiParams: t.unknown to BuildParams whitelist and optional defiParams to SendManyOptions; bump @bitgo/public-types to ^6.39.0
• Unit tests: getVaultConfig happy path + error cases, Concrete dispatch (single sendMany, pendingApproval extraction, passphrase forwarding), Morpho regression guard

Test plan

• yarn unit-test -- --grep "DefiVault" in modules/sdk-core: all passing
• yarn build in modules/sdk-core: no TypeScript errors
• Morpho existing tests are green (regression guard)
• Concrete path: depositToVault with a concrete_btccx vault returns { pendingApprovalId, state }
• Unsupported provider throws descriptive error

CLOSES TICKET: DEFI-279

[linear-code]

DEFI-279

[nvjsr]

can we have common intent type case as I can see most of intent type follow camel case but here we are using Kebab Case ?

[venkateshv1266]

You can see the intentType being followed for other protocols in the same case: https://github.com/BitGo/public-types/blob/cd468bc6db1cf4d47ce69a54100754ea5850c167/src/schema/transactionRequest/intents/defiDepositIntent.ts#L7

[venkateshv1266]

Same in BitGoJS sdk too,

BitGoJS/modules/sdk-core/src/bitgo/wallet/wallet.ts

Lines 4440 to 4469 in 10e5651

	case 'defiApprove':
	txRequest = await this.tssUtils!.prebuildTxWithIntent(
	{
	reqId,
	intentType: 'defi-approve',
	defiParams: params.defiParams as {
	vaultId: string;
	amount: string;
	clientIdempotencyKey?: string;
	},
	},
	apiVersion,
	params.preview
	);
	break;
	case 'defiDeposit':
	txRequest = await this.tssUtils!.prebuildTxWithIntent(
	{
	reqId,
	intentType: 'defi-deposit',
	defiParams: params.defiParams as {
	vaultId: string;
	amount: string;
	operationId?: string;
	clientIdempotencyKey?: string;
	},
	},
	apiVersion,
	params.preview
	);

[nvjsr]

Since we are building a new service, we should align the intent type naming convention with what we follow in WP. The existing intent types use camelCase, so it would be better to keep the same convention here instead of introducing kebab-case.

[venkateshv1266]

In case of morpho, these changes are already done and its live in prod i guess cc: @kamleshmugdiya @hafeezshaik933

[nvjsr]

CI is failing

[OttoAllmendinger]

why are we still not using typed routes?