Skip to main content
Glama

freedom-mcp

by com.getfreedomos
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

Submit product request

submit_product_request
Destructive

File a bug report or feature request about FreedomOS the platform (FO UI, MCP tools, Command Center, auth, connectors, FO agents runtime) with the FreedomOS product team. Creates a FO product-inbox Command Center card and returns a request_id you can poll with get_product_request_status. ONLY for FreedomOS itself broken, missing, or confusing. Do NOT use for: (1) tenant ops (hire agents, send email, OKRs, content); (2) YOUR OWN company product — app code, domain knowledge base, chatbot/SME retrieval, compliance corpus, state/regulatory overlays, or anything your team can ship without FO engineers. Own-product gaps stay on YOUR company Command Center (decision/report card, collaboration, knowledge pipeline, or escalate to your human as product work). Example misroute: Conduit agent filing PCAI state-overlay KB work here — wrong inbox; file on Conduit instead. Before filing, spend at most one or two quick checks seeing if your own tools resolve it (a reconnect, a setting, the wrong page) — if they do, fix it and SAY SO instead of filing; never a debugging quest in chat, and an explicit "file it" from the user always wins, immediately and without pushback.

Routing: FO itself broken/missing/confusing → FILE FIRST via submit_product_request (bug|feature|upgrade), before opening a live coding host; live debug only when the user explicitly asks, never as the default. Tenant-work errors YOU hit → report_feedback; own-product gaps stay on the source company rail.

[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. Call it on the first clear ask; the card is the yes — do not re-ask in chat.]

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
kindYesbug = FO broken; feature = FO missing capability; upgrade = toolchain/security remediation (dep majors, patch-safe upgrades — not a user-facing feature); question = how-to for the FreedomOS team. Not for your own app/product backlog.
titleYesOne-line summary. Specific: "Connect CTA dumps to Smart Tools instead of OAuth" not "bug".
severityNoDefault medium. critical = data loss / security / blocked onboarding.
companyIdYesFreedomOS company id to act within (you must be a member). Required for company-scoped tools.
descriptionYesWhat happened / what you need. Include repro steps, expected vs actual, company name, agent name if relevant.
repro_stepsNoOptional numbered repro steps.
linked_kr_idNoOptional: the FreedomOS Key Result this request moves (a kr-… id from FreedomOS's own OKRs — the unit is FreedomOS work). Validated at filing; a KR that is not live is refused with the live list. Bugs/upgrades default to factory-self (product_defect); a feature approved without one is built as factory-self and counted as unaligned.
suggested_fixNoOptional: what a good fix would look like (agent hypothesis — product team decides).
source_agent_nameNoOptional: which of the operator's agents hit this (e.g. "Linnet", "Morgan").

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changed
    • addedInput schema / properties / linked_kr_id
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "Optional: the FreedomOS Key Result this request moves (a kr-… id from FreedomOS's own OKRs — the unit is FreedomOS work). Validated at filing; a KR that is not live is refused with the live list. Bugs/upgrades default to factory-self (product_defect); a feature approved without one is built as factory-self and counted as unaligned.",
+  "type": "string"
+}
  2. Changed2 schema fields changed
    • changedInput schema / properties / kind / description
      Previous value: -"bug = FO broken; feature = FO missing capability; question = how-to for the FreedomOS team. Not for your own app/product backlog."New value: +"bug = FO broken; feature = FO missing capability; upgrade = toolchain/security remediation (dep majors, patch-safe upgrades — not a user-facing feature); question = how-to for the FreedomOS team. Not for your own app/product backlog."
    • changedInput schema / properties / kind / enum
      Previous value: -[
-  "bug",
-  "feature",
-  "question"
-]New value: +[
+  "bug",
+  "feature",
+  "question",
+  "upgrade"
+]
  3. Changed1 schema field changed
    • changedInput schema / properties / kind / description
      Previous value: -"bug = something broken; feature = missing capability; question = product/how-to for the FreedomOS team."New value: +"bug = FO broken; feature = FO missing capability; question = how-to for the FreedomOS team. Not for your own app/product backlog."
  4. First observed

TDQS

A4.7/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Beyond the annotations (readOnlyHint=false, destructiveHint=true), the description discloses the side effect of creating a Command Center card, the return of a request_id for polling, and the write-tier approval flow (first-use may require manager approval, from-now-on vs just-once approvals, 'the card is the yes — do not re-ask'). This is rich behavioral context that the annotations alone do not provide.

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

Conciseness5/5

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

Although long, the description is tightly structured: purpose, exclusions with explicit alternatives, routing rules, and approval behavior. Every sentence carries distinct decision-relevant information, with no repetition or filler. The key scoping constraint ('ONLY for FreedomOS itself') is front-loaded, and the routing section cleanly summarizes the decision tree.

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 the tool's complexity (9 params, routing ambiguity against a huge sibling list, approval requirements, and a write action), the description is complete. It covers purpose, scope exclusions, alternatives, self-resolution behavior, approval semantics, and the returned request_id, leaving no critical gap an agent would need to infer.

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%, so the baseline is 3; the schema already documents all nine parameters thoroughly. The description adds contextual meaning about when to file and which kind applies ('bug|feature|upgrade' in routing), but it does not add substantive new meaning about individual parameter syntax or formats — it mostly reinforces the schema.

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 names a specific verb ('File'), a precise resource ('bug report or feature request about FreedomOS the platform'), and the concrete outcome ('Creates a FO product-inbox Command Center card and returns a request_id'). It distinguishes itself from siblings by naming get_product_request_status as the polling companion and report_feedback as the alternative for tenant-work errors, so an agent can separate this from adjacent tools without opening schemas.

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 ('ONLY for FreedomOS itself broken, missing, or confusing'), explicit when-not-to-use (tenant ops, own product gaps), and explicit alternatives (report_feedback for tenant-work errors, own company Command Center for own-product gaps). It even includes an example misroute and instructs the agent to first try quick self-resolution, with the user's explicit 'file it' overriding.

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
One endpoint for every MCP toolRayrun runs every MCP server behind one URL and holds the credentials. Each call is decided per client, tool, and argument, then recorded.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

Resources