It shows no requirements other than a desire to be independent.
1) should not be “for light or transient causes”
Which is a suggestion, and further, what constitutes a "light or transient cause" is in the eye of the beholder. They thought their cause of independence was worthy. So did the founder four score and seven years earlier.
2) requires a certain “patient sufferance” while “evils are sufferable”
No it doesn't. You are projecting. Same with the rest of your list. You want the Union to be in the right.
Well they weren't. They don't have a moral leg to stand on.
So the South’s cessation was invalid IMO and I believe the North had a constitutional right to fight them and get them back into the Union.
The same right that George III had to force the Colonies back into their Union.
When the colonies seceded from England, they broke English Law. Law that had a lot longer duration than the US Constitution had up to that point.
Their argument was that "Natural Law" gave them the right. Well if natural law gave the colonies the right, then it gave the Southern states the same right as well.
The D of I is basically a treatise to the world about what justified the colonists’ secession. It is probably the most elegant and well reasoned justification for secession maybe in the history of the world.
The authority of the D of I is not mandatory, but it is presumed and persuasive authority in regards to the Constitution. As I said, the things contained in the D of I are not constitutional dictates, but as the D of I says, what “Prudence, indeed, will dictate...”
The list I provided are factors contained in the D of I, which I think you need to study more. What I quote in that list, what you call “projecting”, are exact quotes in the D of I regarding justification for secession.