freedom-mcp

update_lead

Edit an existing lead in the Leads CRM (crm_leads): name, email, phone, location, do-not-contact flag/reason, lifecycle state (new/active/flagged/archived), or the synopsis fields (title, company_name, tags, notes). Identify the lead with lead_id or email_lookup. Moving state to 'flagged' or 'archived' REQUIRES state_reason. Archiving sets archived_at (safe-archive, reversible — move state off archived to restore it). If the lead's outreach is set to auto and you move it off 'active', outreach is demoted back to manual (auto-outreach is only valid while active). Use when the operator or an agent needs to fix or maintain lead data — wrong email, bad name, DNC request, or a lifecycle move — instead of telling the user to edit it in the UI.

Routing: CRM/sales → edit a lead's fields, status, or DNC flag → use this (NOT update_lead_status/log_activity — those are removed)

[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

Name	Required	Description
`name`	No	New full name.
`tags`	No	Replacement tag list — folded into synopsis_jsonb.manual_entry.
`email`	No	New email (normalized to lowercase/trim). Rejected if it already belongs to another lead in this company.
`notes`	No	Notes about the lead — folded into synopsis_jsonb.manual_entry.
`phone`	No	New phone number.
`state`	No	New lifecycle state. state_reason is REQUIRED when moving to 'flagged' or 'archived'.
`title`	No	Job title — folded into synopsis_jsonb.manual_entry (other manual_entry keys are preserved).
`lead_id`	No	UUID of the lead to update. Provide this OR email_lookup.
`location`	No	New location.
`companyId`	Yes	FreedomOS company id to act within (you must be a member). Required for company-scoped tools.
`company_name`	No	Company they work for — folded into synopsis_jsonb.manual_entry.
`email_lookup`	No	The lead's CURRENT email, used to find it. Provide this OR lead_id.
`state_reason`	No	Reason for the state change. Required when state is 'flagged' or 'archived'.
`do_not_contact`	No	Set true to flag the lead do-not-contact (excluded from outreach); false to clear it.
`do_not_contact_reason`	No	Reason for do_not_contact, e.g. 'customer', 'churned', 'opted_out'.

TDQS

A4.7/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

With no annotations, description covers many behaviors: required state_reason for flagged/archived, auto-outreach demotion, email uniqueness check, reversible archive. Lacks mention of rate limits or authorization details beyond write-tier approval.

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?

Well-structured with purpose, rules, usage, and approval note. Concise given the detail, though slightly lengthy. Every sentence serves a purpose.

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?

For a 15-parameter tool with no output schema, description covers behavioral constraints, special cases, identification methods, and approval tier. Comprehensive without gaps.

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

Parameters5/5

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

Despite 100% schema coverage, description adds significant value: explains state_reason requirement, email_lookup vs lead_id, do_not_contact interaction, synopsis_jsonb folding, email normalization and rejection. Goes well beyond schema basics.

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 clearly states 'Edit an existing lead' and lists all editable fields. It distinguishes from siblings by naming update_lead_status/log_activity as removed, providing clear differentiation.

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: 'when the operator or an agent needs to fix or maintain lead data' and provides alternatives (not to use update_lead_status/log_activity). Also includes routing context.

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?