Verification & Sources

Evidence state: Recheck due
Source links: 1
Freshness: Needs recheck: checked July 24, 2026
Last updated: July 24, 2026

What this evidence state means

Definition: The claim was previously checked, but its review window expired or a material change may have invalidated it.
Required provenance: The prior evidence and check date are retained, together with the expiry or change signal that triggered recheck.
Owner: Kingy freshness queue owner and assigned editorial reviewer
Freshness rule: This is already outside its freshness rule. It must not be presented as current until reviewed against current evidence.
Disputes and corrections: Use “Suggest a correction” on the record. Kingy editorial reviews the cited evidence, records material corrections, and changes or removes the state when it is not supported.

Key source checks

Official site

Suggest a correction

Last verified: July 24, 2026

note.md is a local-first macOS workspace for reading papers, managing sources, writing in Markdown, and tracing citations back to the evidence behind them. Its Premium tools add on-device semantic search, automatic indexing, research-matrix extraction, and Evidence Scan without sending the research library to a cloud model.

Identity resolved

This profile covers the product at notemd.org, built by ARSoftware UG (haftungsbeschränkt) in Germany. It is not the similarly named Markdown editor at notemd.net. The first-party company page, product site, pricing page, App Store link, and technical articles all identify the same macOS research product.

What note.md does

The free workspace combines a PDF reader, source manager, Markdown editor, citation workflow, graph view, and local project vault. Notes and PDFs remain in files on the Mac. Citations created from a source can link back to the relevant passage, while a bibliography can be exported as a standard .bib file.

The architecture article says Premium indexing, retrieval, Matrix, and Evidence Scan workflows share a local SQLite-based index. Its semantic search combines vector similarity with keyword matching. Those are vendor-documented implementation details, not independent performance results, so buyers should test retrieval quality with their own papers and terminology.

Where it fits

Reading a paper beside a note and keeping the citation tied to the highlighted evidence.
Maintaining a plain-file research vault that remains usable outside the app.
Searching a private literature collection by meaning without uploading the collection.
Building an editable literature-review matrix or checking a draft claim against imported sources.

Researchers comparing local knowledge tools can follow related AI News and browse the AI tools directory.

Pricing and access

The official pricing page lists the writing workspace at $0. Premium is shown at $8.99 per month, $49.99 per year, or $99.99 as a one-time purchase. Student pricing is listed at $4.99 per month or $29.99 per year. Purchases are managed through the App Store and can vary by region, so the live page and Apple account remain the authority at checkout.

What to test

PDF metadata, citation accuracy, page anchors, and bibliography export.
Retrieval results for technical language, synonyms, tables, and contradictory evidence.
Import and export behavior for an existing Zotero or Markdown workflow.
Local model speed, storage use, and battery impact on the intended Mac.
Backup and recovery for the project folder and its local index.

Limits and tradeoffs

note.md is macOS-only and younger than established combinations such as Zotero plus Obsidian. The official site says direct Zotero-library import is not yet supported, although PDFs can be imported and bibliographies can be exported. Teams that require Windows or Linux, Word integration, mature group libraries, or mobile access should confirm those gaps before moving a working research archive.

Bottom line

The product has enough first-party evidence to support an indexable profile: a live product site, named company, current pricing, App Store access, detailed workflows, and implementation articles. Its useful distinction is the combination of a plain-file research workspace and local retrieval. A trial should begin with a copied project, not the only copy of an active research library.

Verified sources

Later product and pricing changes can be tracked through AI News.

Tool Links

Official site Latest launch profile Company profile

Launch History

AI Research Tools Launch date: June 26, 2026 Added: July 9, 2026 Last verified: July 24, 2026

note.md Local LLM Memory

note.md updated its local-first macOS research workspace so cited notes and research documentation can serve as private, file-based memory for AI tools.

Recheck due Free: Unknown API: Unknown Open: Unknown

Clear use caseBeginner-friendly

Launch readiness: 6.4 / 10
Demo evidence: Not scored yet
Creator-story fit: Not scored yet

Score definitions and rubric

These are launch-record readiness heuristics, not product ratings.

Launch readiness

How complete and reviewable the launch record is, not the quality of the product.

Inputs and weights: Launch date 15%; qualifying source 10%; what launched 10%; demo 15%; category 10%; audience 10%; editorial assessment 10%; traction evidence 10%; creator or audience fit 10%.

Evidence inputs: Reviewed launch metadata, public source links, demo links, taxonomy, audience, editorial notes, and recorded traction signals.

Demo evidence

Whether the record contains useful, reviewable demonstration evidence; it is not a rating of product output quality.

Inputs and weights: Working demo URL 45%; video walkthrough 25%; clear description of what launched 10%; audience 10%; editorial assessment 10%.

Evidence inputs: Demo and video URLs plus the reviewed launch description, audience, and editorial notes.

Creator-story fit

Whether a launch has enough demonstrable evidence and audience relevance for a useful creator story; it does not predict views or guarantee coverage.

Inputs and weights: Demo evidence 25%; visual creator category 15%; audience 15%; editorial assessment 15%; traction evidence 10%; pricing clarity 10%; API or open-weight evidence 10%.

Evidence inputs: Reviewed demo, category, audience, editorial, traction, pricing, API, and open-weight fields.

Scale: 0.0–10.0. A present qualifying input receives its published weight; a missing input receives zero. Scores are rounded to one decimal.
Assigned by: Suggested by the deterministic field-completeness helper and assigned or approved by a Kingy editorial reviewer.
Rubric and check date: Rubric version P0-2026-08-10. The record’s “Last verified” date is the score check date. Checked: 2026-07-24.
Confidence and missing data: Confidence depends on source completeness. “Not scored yet” means no reviewed value; “Needs review” means the value or score set failed validation.
Freshness: Recalculate after a material launch, source, demo, pricing, audience, or traction change and during the record freshness review.
Disputes: Use “Suggest a correction” on the record and cite the relevant evidence. Commercial relationships cannot buy or alter a score.

note.md launched a local-first Mac research workspace that turns cited notes and documentation into local LLM memory for private search, with a public pricing…

View launch View tool profile Source Suggest correction

Submit a related launch Get a Launch Visibility Score Sponsor Kingy AI Estimate creator ROI Contact Kingy AI