fix(sdk): use signed permit chain for decrypt requests

[Lesnak1]

Summary

• derive permit-based decrypt requests from the permit's EIP-712 signed chain ID
• use that chain consistently for threshold-network URL selection and the request payload
• cover both decryptForView and decryptForTx with regression tests
• leave the no-permit/global-allowance path unchanged

Problem

withPermit(permit) is documented to use the supplied permit regardless of the builder's chain ID or account. Both decrypt builders already extracted permit._signedDomain.chainId to choose between mock and production execution, but the production methods still resolved the threshold-network URL and populated the request chainId from the builder state.

As a result, a directly supplied permit could:

• throw ChainIdUninitialized when the builder chain was unset, or
• route the request using a stale/different builder chain.

Fix

Pass the signed permit chain ID into the production decrypt methods and use it for both configuration lookup and the threshold-network request. The global-allowance path continues to use the resolved builder/public-client chain.

A patch changeset is included.

Verification

• pnpm --filter @cofhe/sdk exec vitest run --project node core/test/decryptBuilders.test.ts — 34 passed
• pnpm --filter @cofhe/sdk check:types
• pnpm --filter @cofhe/sdk build
• pnpm --filter @cofhe/sdk lint — 0 errors
• Prettier and git diff --check

The regression fixtures create a real local EIP-712 permit signature; only the external threshold-network boundary is isolated.

[changeset-bot]

🦋 Changeset detected

Latest commit: e162a8c

The changes in this PR will be included in the next version bump.

This PR includes changesets to release 9 packages

Name	Type
@cofhe/sdk	Patch
@cofhe/abi	Patch
@cofhe/hardhat-3-plugin	Patch
@cofhe/hardhat-plugin	Patch
@cofhe/mock-contracts	Patch
@cofhe/react	Patch
@cofhe/site	Patch
@cofhe/example-react	Patch
@cofhe/foundry-plugin	Patch

Not sure what this means? Click here to learn what changesets are.

Click here if you're a maintainer who wants to add another changeset to this PR

[vercel]

@Lesnak1 is attempting to deploy a commit to the Fhenix Team on Vercel.

A member of the Team first needs to authorize it.

[claude]

Claude Code Review

This pull request is from a fork — automated review is disabled. A repository maintainer can comment @claude review to run a one-time review.

[Lesnak1]

Hi team, same situation as #323 - the Permit to ACP migration on master has structurally diverged from this PR's signed permit chain logic.

Happy to rewrite against the new ACP API, or close this if it's been superseded. Let me know!