Skip to main content
Glama

freedom-mcp

by com.getfreedomos

save_knowledge

Save a Markdown knowledge file. Use for guidelines, SOPs, strategies, meeting notes, contact lists, trackers, or any reference material that agents read and update over time. Do not use for a Play or Playbook — those are create_playbook / list_playbooks / run_playbook (growth_tactics, Plays rail). SOP/reference copies may still live here. Pass scope="personal" to save private notes visible only to the current user (e.g., notes tied to their commitments).

Routing: Play / Playbook (reusable runnable company loop) → create_playbook, not this tool. SOP / guidelines / notes → use this

[write-tier — first use may require a manager's approval; a from-now-on approval makes future calls seamless, a just-once approval re-asks next time.]

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
slugNoOptional custom slug for the filename. If omitted, auto-generated from the title.
scopeNoWhere to save: "company" (default) = shared with the whole company; "personal" = private to the current user only. Use "personal" for notes tied to a specific person (e.g., context for the user's commitments, 1:1 notes, personal preferences, gift ideas, family info). Use "company" for shared SOPs, brand guides, strategy docs.
titleYesDescriptive title for this knowledge file (e.g., "Acme Mascot Guidelines", "Content Strategy Q1")
folderNoOptional folder to save the file in (e.g., "acme-deal", "partners/acme"). Folders are auto-created. Use for organizing related files, especially for deal rooms or shared contexts.
contentYesThe knowledge content in Markdown format. FORMATTING RULES: Use ## headers for sections (NOT **bold**). Put a blank line between every paragraph and before/after lists. Use - for list items. Structure: ## Section > ### Sub-section > paragraph > - list items. Without blank lines, content renders as a wall of text.
companyIdNoFreedomOS company id to act within (you must be a member). Required for company-scoped tools.
override_duplicate_reasonNoONLY after the canon gate refused this save as a duplicate: a specific reason why this file is NOT a duplicate of the canonical file the refusal named. Overrides are logged and visible to the operator — never use this to bypass the gate casually.

TDQS

A4.3/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the burden. It discloses the write-tier approval requirement (first use may require manager approval, from-now-on vs just-once). It does not mention duplicate gating or authentication details, but these are partially captured in parameter descriptions. The approval note adds meaningful behavioral context beyond the schema.

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?

The description is well-structured and front-loaded with the core purpose. It includes multiple sentences but each adds value (use cases, exclusions, routing, approval note). It is slightly longer than minimal, but every section earns its place, keeping it efficient.

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?

For a tool with 7 parameters and high schema coverage, the description covers routing, use cases, and approval context. It does not explicitly mention duplicate handling or return behavior, but these are either covered in schema (override_duplicate_reason) or not required given no output schema. Overall, an agent has enough guidance to call it correctly.

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?

Schema description coverage is 100% and each parameter (scope, content, slug, folder, companyId, override_duplicate_reason) already has detailed descriptions. The tool description adds little beyond what the schema provides, though it reinforces the personal vs. company scope distinction. This meets the baseline for high coverage.

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?

The description opens with 'Save a Markdown knowledge file,' a clear verb+resource statement. It then lists concrete use cases (guidelines, SOPs, meeting notes, etc.) and explicitly distinguishes from Play/Playbook by naming create_playbook, making it unambiguous which sibling is intended.

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?

The description gives explicit 'when to use' (guidelines, SOPs, reference material) and 'when not to use' (Play/Playbook) with named alternatives (create_playbook, list_playbooks, run_playbook). It also provides a routing rule at the end, leaving no ambiguity.

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