Fulcra MCP Server

Create Group

create_group

Creates a Fulcra user group so you can share data with multiple people at once; optionally enables members to share selected data types read-only for a set time range.

Instructions

Create a group of Fulcra users, e.g. to share with several people at once.

Without data_types joining shares nothing; members just use the group as a target for create_share. With data_types, every member shares those types (within the time range) read-only with the user until they leave; this cannot be changed later. Creating does not make the user a member: call join_group too, or shares made to the group never reach them. Anyone who learns the ID can join and the owner cannot remove members, so treat it like a password. Only create a group the user asked for.

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`title`	Yes	Group title shown to prospective members.
`time_end`	No	End of the shared-data range. Must include tz (ISO8601).
`data_types`	No	Data type IDs members will share (see `get_data_catalog`). Omit for a group that collects nothing.
`time_start`	No	Start of the shared-data range. Must include tz (ISO8601).
`description`	Yes	What the group is for.
`friendly_id`	No	Human-friendly ID (lowercase letters, digits, "-", "_").
`responsible_entity`	Yes	Person or organization responsible for the group.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed16 schema fields changedv1.18.7Oct 23, 2026

removedInput schema / properties / data_types / anyOf

Removed value: -[
-  {
-    "items": {
-      "type": "string"
-    },
-    "type": "array"
-  },
-  {
-    "type": "null"
-  }
-]

removedInput schema / properties / data_types / default
```
Removed value: -null
```
addedInput schema / properties / data_types / items
```
Added value: +{
+  "type": "string"
+}
```
addedInput schema / properties / data_types / type
```
Added value: +"array"
```

removedInput schema / properties / friendly_id / anyOf

Removed value: -[
-  {
-    "type": "string"
-  },
-  {
-    "type": "null"
-  }
-]

removedInput schema / properties / friendly_id / default
```
Removed value: -null
```
addedInput schema / properties / friendly_id / type
```
Added value: +"string"
```

removedInput schema / properties / time_end / anyOf

Removed value: -[
-  {
-    "format": "date-time",
-    "type": "string"
-  },
-  {
-    "type": "null"
-  }
-]

removedInput schema / properties / time_end / default
```
Removed value: -null
```
addedInput schema / properties / time_end / format
```
Added value: +"date-time"
```
addedInput schema / properties / time_end / type
```
Added value: +"string"
```

removedInput schema / properties / time_start / anyOf

Removed value: -[
-  {
-    "format": "date-time",
-    "type": "string"
-  },
-  {
-    "type": "null"
-  }
-]

removedInput schema / properties / time_start / default
```
Removed value: -null
```
addedInput schema / properties / time_start / format
```
Added value: +"date-time"
```
addedInput schema / properties / time_start / type
```
Added value: +"string"
```

changedOutput schema / (root)

Previous value: -{
-  "properties": {
-    "result": {
-      "type": "string"
-    }
-  },
-  "required": [
-    "result"
-  ],
-  "type": "object",
-  "x-fastmcp-wrap-result": true
-}New value: +null

Addedv1.1.0Oct 7, 2026

TDQS

A4.7/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

Goes well beyond the annotations (readOnlyHint=false, destructiveHint=false) by disclosing consequences the agent cannot infer: sharing with `data_types` is permanent and cannot be changed later, the creator is not auto-joined, and the group ID is effectively a secret because anyone who learns it can join and the owner cannot remove members. These are exactly the risk facts an agent needs before invoking a creation tool.

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?

Front-loaded with the purpose, then progressively more conditional detail, with no filler sentences. The middle sentence about `data_types` is long and compound, but each clause carries distinct behavioral information, so the density is justified rather than wasteful.

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 7-parameter mutation tool with no output schema, the description covers the consequential behaviors, membership rules, and security posture thoroughly. The only gap is the return value — the group ID is only implied by 'anyone who learns the ID', not stated as what the call yields.

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

Parameters4/5

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

Schema coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3, but the description adds real semantics beyond the schema text: it explains what omitting `data_types` means (collects nothing) and that the time range bounds a read-only share that is immutable afterward. It does not clarify `friendly_id` or `responsible_entity` beyond the schema, keeping it at 4 rather than 5.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('Create a group of Fulcra users') plus the motivation ('to share with several people at once'). It is clearly distinguishable from sibling tools like join_group, create_share, and get_groups.

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 branches on the `data_types` parameter (omit = nothing shared; include = members share read-only until they leave), names the follow-up tool (`join_group`) and the alternative target (`create_share`), and states a hard gating rule: 'Only create a group the user asked for.' That is when-to-use, when-not, and alternatives all in one place.

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

Deploy Server

Create Group

Instructions

Input Schema

Schema Changelog

TDQS

Other Tools