Hi Tim,
I wouldn’t say there is a right or wrong, just a better or worse, depending on your needs and your source images.
Is 16 bit TIFF supported now? I don’t remember since I only use high quality JPGs developed from RAW. This is ok for many cases, I would thinkt that the difference is rather small. But if you want the last possible bit of information, then your approach might be worth the additional time and storage space. If you want to avoid the detour via TIFF, you might want to consider using RAWs directly, which is possible when you have a driver installed that enables windows to display your RAWs natively.
So far I’ve always used camera WB, since for whatever reason my developer does not seem to like my RAWs since they get all magenta with automatic WB… :-) My point is that ok is what meets your visual needs. I can’t imagine any problems arising from changing WB other than the colours of the output, because the “features” within the images will stay the same.
Here is a post (no. 3) https://support.capturingreality.com/hc/en-us/community/posts/115002690471-Starting-and-continuing-a-project- where Luxcubed says that he alters the images extensively (sharpening, de-noising, the whole bit) which is usually not recommended. But he says his results are better with the alterations as oppose to almost unchanged ones. So you really need to try and see for yourself…