I agree that the run boundary instruction is useless as it is configured at the moment. My solution was to create clamps that only intrude 5mm into the workpiece area for both horizontal and vertical dimensions. The newly created table with an additional 36 holes is a really valuable adjunct to workpiece holding, even where I am limited to 90mm square. I ensure that my software definitions are always drawn 6mm away from the edge of any workpiece shape and I transport the endmill bit at a jog height of 6mm.
That saves me the bother of trying to make a run boundary assessment. The 3D printing of anything is just something I have not tried yet; the result is printing what I might need has not occurred to me. I could usefully spend a couple of full time months working on 3D printing alone. I suppose if cut toolpaths are configurable for direction, it may be possible to create clamps that are sacrificial during any of the Snapmaker processes… a bit like tabs but on the workpiece surface. It may be worth investigating as a work modality but there is usually a rational explanation why people do not reinvent the wheel.
My jig for 40mm cubes was enormously functional for me because of the horizontal clamps that worked by cam action. If one had a large surface area to use them, they are a great solution. I will have a 406.4 x 406.4 mm area to carve within after my new CNC machine is delivered. The flat clamps will work well there and they are only 13mm in depth (but require 20mm depth for locating the parf dogs. A new waste board is very much on the cards and with the threaded screw pieces recommended to me by @Melanchrom, I should be able to make a fair attempt at providing a waste board with horizontal clamping abilities.