docs: better documentation on argument assumptions

[gdalle]

• Explicitly document argument assumptions vis-a-vis mutation (fixes Be more explicit about assumptions #861)
• Add a note about sparse preparation and random inputs (fixes Stress that preparation should rather happen on typical than random inputs for sparse stuff #905)
• Generalize accepted coloring algorithms following latest SMC release
• Bump versions of DI and DIT, update changelogs

[codecov]

Codecov Report

✅ All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests.
✅ Project coverage is 98.11%. Comparing base (03588c7) to head (67eea26).
⚠️ Report is 1 commits behind head on main.

Additional details and impacted files

@@           Coverage Diff           @@
##             main     #917   +/-   ##
=======================================
  Coverage   98.11%   98.11%           
=======================================
  Files         133      133           
  Lines        7971     7971           
=======================================
  Hits         7821     7821           
  Misses        150      150           

Flag	Coverage Δ
DI	98.85% <ø> (ø)
DIT	96.19% <ø> (ø)

Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more.

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

🚀 New features to boost your workflow:

• ❄️ Test Analytics: Detect flaky tests, report on failures, and find test suite problems.

[gdalle]

@copilot the tests for this PR fail due to additional allocations in ForwardDiff sparse Jacobians. However, I didn't change anything in the package code itself, only the docs. What could be the reaason for the test failure?
Start by comparing:

• a successful test log: https://github.com/JuliaDiff/DifferentiationInterface.jl/actions/runs/19366824592/job/55412058961
• a failed test log: https://github.com/JuliaDiff/DifferentiationInterface.jl/actions/runs/19396736326/job/55497764841