I didn't say "best rogue", the warding dwarf is narrower than that - the best lock and trap remover (which in 1st-3rd edition was the main reason for including a rogue).
Sure. But in fifth edition ANY character can be proficient in Thieves' Tools because of backgrounds. So you're right: the Mark of Warding dwarf will be the best trap remover in the party, and they can be that with ANY class by taking the Criminal background. And with +1 Dex and +1 Int, they can pursue a wide range of classes; Dexterity is useful to almost anyone, while Intelligence will help with Wizard and probably artificer.
By comparison, the mountain dwarf gets +2 Strength, which is all but useless to anyone who's not playing a melee class, and proficiency with light and medium armor, which is likely useless if you ARE playing a melee class. If you ask me, the Mountain Dwarf is far narrower than the Warding Dwarf; I don't see anyone who's going to choose it just to get medium armor proficiency, so it's basically there for someone trying to maximize their strength. By contrast, BECAUSE trap removal is no longer limited to one class, the fact that the Warding dwarf specializes in that talent doesn't limit them to one narrow path.
So speaking purely to Warding, I think it's more versatile than Mountain Dwarf. Meanwhile, Hill Dwarf is just bland. Sure, anyone can use extra hit points. But that doesn't make my character more interesting in any way, and it's not as though it's a LOT of extra hit points. No one's forcing you to take Warding Dwarf, and it's not like the intuition ability is SO good that players will say "I want to make a trap removing character... I was going to be a Tabaxi, but I can't pass up that sweet dwarfness." I think it makes a character more INTERESTING than either the Hill or Mountain Dwarf; the Mountain Dwarf is about having the best Strength, the Hill dwarf is just about survival.
Everything about the marks screams specific party role (which is different and narrower than class) - Hospitality: party face, Handling: Beastmaster, and so on.
Now I'm a little confused. Are you an Eberron player? If so, how and why would you make a version of dragonmarks that DIDN'T focus on a particular role? The whole point of the dragonmarks is that they make their bearers better at a particular thing, which has helped them carve out economic niches in the world. This is a 5E conversion of dragonmarks. How would YOU make the Mark of Warding—reflecting the fact that House Kundarak is known for their talent for crafting and dealing with traps and locks—without making that character good at dealing with traps and locks? How would you make the Mark of Hospitality without making the character a good party face? Is your complaint that you think this is a flawed interpretation of dragonmarks, or that you don't like dragonmarks in the first place?