Skip to main content
Glama

freedom-mcp

by com.getfreedomos

get_lead_pipeline_snapshot

Aggregate counts of the Leads CRM (crm_leads) for the current company: active leads by temperature (warm/cold/…/unset) and lifecycle stage, plus do-not-contact and archived totals. THE source of truth for "how many leads do we have and how warm are they" — never estimate or zero-fill lead counts; call this instead. Read-only. Note: paying customers live in Stripe (get_subscription_stats), not here.

Routing: CRM/sales → lead counts or pipeline temperature snapshot → use this

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
companyIdYesFreedomOS company id to act within (you must be a member). Required for company-scoped tools.

TDQS

A4.4/5.0
Behavior4/5

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. Clearly states 'Read-only', 'source of truth', and 'aggregate counts' implying no destructive actions. Could mention authorization but the schema already covers that with companyId requirement.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness4/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

Description is front-loaded with core info and includes routing context. Slightly verbose but every sentence adds value. Could be slightly shorter without losing meaning.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness5/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

Given simple input schema (1 param) and no output schema, the description adequately describes the output format (counts by temperature, stage, DNC, archived) and provides sufficient context for a straightforward aggregation tool.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters3/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Only one parameter (companyId) with 100% schema description coverage. The schema already explains it well; description adds no additional semantic value beyond what schema provides.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose5/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

Description uses specific verb 'aggregate' and resource 'leads CRM', enumerates detailed breakdowns (by temperature, lifecycle stage, DNC, archived), and clearly distinguishes from sibling get_subscription_stats by stating that paying customers are in Stripe, not here.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines5/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

Explicitly states when to use ('never estimate or zero-fill lead counts; call this instead'), gives routing context, and explicitly notes when not to use (paying customers in Stripe) with alternative tool named.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.

All freedom-mcp toolsInspect
Try in Browser
RayrunBuild, deploy, and operate MCP servers without becoming an infrastructure team.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

TDQS

A3.6/5.0
Disambiguation4/5

The tool set is heavily disambiguated by detailed routing descriptions, domain prefixes, and lifecycle verbs, so most tools have a clear intended purpose. However, at 297 tools there are still close pairs and overlapping decision surfaces (e.g., approval workflows, 'what should I work on' readers, multiple finance/ads readers) that require careful description reading to avoid misselection.

Naming Consistency4/5

Naming is predominantly consistent snake_case verb_noun with strong domain prefixes like shopify_, x_, posthog_, and list_/create_/update_ patterns. Minor inconsistencies exist, such as several collection-returning tools using get_ (get_team_members, get_icps, get_okrs) instead of list_, and some generate_ vs create_ vs draft_ verbs, but the pattern is still predictable overall.

Tool Count1/5

297 tools is an extreme outlier and far beyond a usable MCP tool surface. Even a large suite has no justification for this count in one server; the agent would struggle to select among hundreds of similarly descriptive tools, and the natural 3-15 tool range is exceeded by nearly 20x.

Completeness4/5

The individual domains represented — OKRs, CRM/leads, Shopify, content pipelines, ads, PostHog, team hiring, knowledge, finance, and session management — are covered remarkably well with full lifecycle patterns. Minor gaps exist, such as no full deal CRUD, no delete for several Google/Shopify artifacts, and some analytical surfaces being read-heavy, but most workflows can be completed without dead ends.

Resources