DDD preaches persistence ignorance, which states that your domain artifacts (classes for entities, value objects) should be unaware of how they're persisted. However, technical persistence concerns cannot always be easily avoided or delayed. As a result, the model in code will usually be affected by constraints of the persistence technology.
You've already foreshadowed the best approach: tiny steps. The question is what constitutes a step. Initial steps can consist of the designing the model in code and then implementing persistence. A subsequent step repeats the process. The fact that the steps are small reduces the chance that you'll create a design in code which cannot be easily persisted all while prioritizing focus on the model over the database.
Regarding the use of SQL Management studio vs EF generators, this is a matter of preference. I prefer to hand-code SQL, others may enjoy the generation facilities of EF.