>starting point for any moral system must be personal agency.

I agree with this premise, but I cannot discount the inverse; that any personal agency must have morality as it's starting point, in order to be at all distinguishable from lack of personal agency. Freedom by itself does "create" morality, it just doesn't differentiate between moral action and immoral action, without some premise beyond freedom itself; a "boundary", in your formulation. Your analysis confuses moral bounds for mere principle, and simultaneously appears to demand morality be a "limit" that somehow requires adherence beyond moral dictate, as if being immoral made an action physically impossible for the moral agent making moral judgements, even for itself and according to it's own moral strictures, to execute.