Back in the day, they used relatively weak and unhardened alloys for the valve face and seat. They got away with this because the lead in the fuel, which is a lubricant, coated the parts and protected them. So, for break in, you needed a tank or two of leaded fuel to coat the parts and then needed to ocassionally use leaded to re-coat. The auto industry quickly moved to better alloys or hardening to survive without the lead, but am sure aviation did not follow suit for a long time. Don't know when lycoming changed things and presume they now use modern materials, but can't say that with any confidence beyond their current approval of unleaded fuels.
So, fopr a modern engine, there should be no need for leaded fuel ever. The lead propvides no other benefits beyond above along with its octane enhancing benefit.
I did my break-in with unleaded - UL91. If I were you, I'd talk to your engine builder to see what they recommend. If you follow their recommendations and there is a problem, even if unrelated, the conversation with them will be easier.
Having attended Lycoming's engine build school I was told that the main reason is the extra octane of 100LL can help during engine breakin incase timing is set wrong or the cylinder overheats. You have more detonation margin vs 91UL especially if cylinder temps go crazy.