Reasonable people may disagree on this. I don't think there is a "right" answer. That said, this is what I think.
You want the NARSUM to accurately list all of your disqualifying conditions, including the history, diagnosis, prognosis, treatment, and how the condition impacts your function. If it hits these high points, to me, you should be satisfied.
What you are talking about submitting does not really apply to the MEB. You want to ensure the NARSUM lists that you are taking this drug. But the argument about the rating really is something that the PEB would address.
Still, that leaves the question of when to submit. The argument for extra-schedular rating is a tough one to win at the Board level. I have seen it happen once out of several hundred cases. So, I think you have an uphill battle with getting the board to grant an award under this theory. However, I think you have much better chances if you were to fight this in federal court.
Given that, you (and your attorney) need to make a tactical decision of when to raise this. I think the answer to that depends on the strength of the rest of your case. If you have a better argument for an acceptable rating, I would go with that at the Formal Board level. You could then submit the argument on appeal. I, again, don't have much confidence that the Board or the CG would get it right on their own. But it creates the issue for BCMR whether the Board or the agency correctly decided the issue. This would then keep the issue alive for court review. On the other hand, if you have nothing else, I might argue this directly at the Formal. It is really a judgment call and hard to know with out assessing the strength of the case overall.
Hope this made sense. If you have any questions, as always, ask away!