freedom-mcp

get_product_context

Returns THIS company's product truth — the operator-authored offer + the SHIPPED, marketable capabilities (what the product does, and what it cannot do). Call this before describing, marketing, pricing, positioning, or selling the product. Ground every product claim in what this returns; never invent capabilities or an offer. If it reports the product is not defined, escalate to the operator instead of guessing.

Routing: product / offer / what we sell / pricing / positioning / marketing or sales copy → call get_product_context FIRST; never fabricate capabilities or an offer

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`companyId`	Yes	FreedomOS company id to act within (you must be a member). Required for company-scoped tools.

TDQS

A4.3/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

No annotations provided, so description bears full burden. Discloses return content (offer + capabilities) and edge case (product not defined). Lacks explicit statement about read-only nature, but context implies no side effects. Sufficient for safe usage.

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 clear and well-structured with a concise purpose statement, usage instructions, and a routing section. Every sentence adds value, though minor verbosity could be trimmed. Not excessively long.

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

Completeness4/5

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

No output schema, but description adequately explains what the tool returns (offer + capabilities) and how to handle undefined product. Sufficient for an agent to understand the tool's role and expected output.

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 parameter companyId is fully described in schema with 100% coverage. Description adds no further parameter details beyond what schema provides. Baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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 clearly states the tool returns 'operator-authored offer + shipped, marketable capabilities' and provides routing instructions to call before product-related tasks. It distinguishes itself as the authoritative source for product truth.

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: before describing, marketing, pricing, positioning, or selling. Provides a clear directive to ground all claims in this tool's output and to escalate if product is undefined. No alternative tools suggested but routing indicates precedence.

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

All freedom-mcp tools Inspect

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

Need Help?