grocy-mcp

Entity Create Tool

entity_create_tool

Create a new object of any Grocy entity type by supplying the entity name and a JSON data payload. Use this low-level tool when a domain-specific create tool is not available.

Instructions

Create a new object of any Grocy entity type.

This is a low-level tool — prefer the domain-specific create tools (recipe_create_tool, chore_create_tool) when available.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`data`	Yes	JSON object with fields for the new entity. Required fields vary by entity type. Example for products: '{"name": "Oat Milk"}'. Example for locations: '{"name": "Pantry", "is_freezer": 0}'.
`entity`	Yes	Entity type name (e.g. 'products', 'locations', 'tasks').

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`result`	Yes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.2.0Sep 15, 2026

TDQS

A3.9/5.0

Behavior2/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It mentions 'low-level' which hints at a raw operation, but it doesn't disclose any side effects, validation behavior, permissions, or consequences of invalid data. For a mutation tool, this is a significant gap.

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?

Two concise sentences with zero waste. The core purpose is front-loaded, and the usage guidance is included without redundancy.

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

Completeness3/5

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

The description is adequate for a generic tool with a full schema and output schema. It tells the agent what it does and when to use it. However, it lacks any behavioral context such as error handling, data validation, or reversibility, which would be useful for a low-level operation.

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 schema fully documents both parameters. The description adds no extra meaning about parameters beyond what the schema provides. Baseline 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 action: 'Create a new object of any Grocy entity type.' It identifies the resource (Grocy entities) and the verb (create). It also explicitly differentiates itself from domain-specific tools, making it distinct from siblings like recipe_create_tool and chore_create_tool.

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 explicitly instructs to prefer domain-specific create tools when available, naming examples. This gives the agent clear guidance on when to use this generic tool versus alternatives, leaving no ambiguity.

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

Deploy Server