NGjockey
EO climb out paths are no IFR procedures, it's operators responsibility. How much of allowance is included depends on the provider to whom it is outsourced, and what the airline would ask for.
IT IS SURVIVAL CRITICAL TO FLY TRACKS AS PRECISELY AS POSSIBLE.
In an obstacle limited environment, usually witnessed by a complex routing of the EFP such as you provided, any extra padding beyond the regulatory minimum width of the protection area will incur a payload restriction. For every single departure. This is a massive economical problem and for long haul liners a real payload range issue. Hence any performance evaluation / guarantee will include the MTOM at common less than-favourite conditions for the given homebase rwy and EFP.
You do not need to ask at all then if the calculated corridor has been widened beyond the minimum. And when you see those numbers it is freaking narrow. IIRC 800 m each side from the theoretical centreline EASA rules, though I heard once the FAA are more reasonable.