fcop-mcp

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

Create Custom Team

create_custom_team

Create an FCoP project with a custom roster of roles, defining the team name, role codes, and leader. Use validate_team_config first to catch illegal role codes before initializing the project.

Instructions

Create an FCoP project with a custom roster of roles.

Role codes can be anything — they become part of task filenames, e.g. TASK-20260423-001-BOSS-to-CODER.md. Use validate_team_config first to catch illegal role codes without writing anything.

Since 3.0.2 fresh init produces the v3 topology (per spec §1.1): fcop/_lifecycle/{inbox,active,review,done,archive}/ plus retained reports/ / issues/ / shared/. Superseded v2 buckets (tasks/, log/) are no longer created on fresh init.

Custom teams have no bundled three-layer docs, so fcop/shared/ is left empty (apart from the project's own shared/README.md). The recommended next step is to read the closest preset (fcop://teams/<closest-preset> — see the teams/_data/README.md "Custom teams" section) and hand-author your own TEAM-README.md / TEAM-ROLES.md / TEAM-OPERATING-RULES.md + roles/{ROLE}.md based on it.

The other init artifacts are deposited as usual: fcop/fcop.json, LETTER-TO-ADMIN.md, workspace/README.md, plus the protocol rule files at .cursor/rules/*.mdc + AGENTS.md + CLAUDE.md (existing copies archived under .fcop/migrations/).

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`lang`	No	Output language, ``zh`` or ``en``.	zh
`force`	No	When ``True``, overwrite an already-initialized project. Existing config / letter / workspace README / ``shared/`` files are archived under ``.fcop/migrations/<timestamp>/`` before the new ones land. Default: ``False``.
`roles`	Yes	Comma-separated role codes (e.g. ``"BOSS,CODER,TESTER"``).
`leader`	Yes	Leader role code; must appear in ``roles``.
`team_name`	Yes	Display name for the team (e.g. ``"My Design Studio"``).

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`result`	Yes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv3.2.4May 28, 2026

TDQS

A4.8/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden, and it delivers: it explains what files are created, what v3 topology is produced, that fcop/shared/ is left empty for custom teams, and that existing files are archived under .fcop/migrations/. This is rich behavioral disclosure beyond the schema.

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?

The description is long, but every section earns its place: purpose, role semantics, topology behavior, missing docs, and next steps. It is front-loaded with the core purpose and includes structured details that matter for correct invocation, though it could be slightly tightened.

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, the absence of annotations, and the presence of an output schema, the description is remarkably complete. It covers preconditions (validate first), exact filesystem effects, what is NOT created, overwrite behavior, and recommended follow-up actions.

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. The description adds extra meaning by explaining that role codes become part of task filenames and by illustrating the format, which helps the agent understand the impact of the roles parameter beyond its raw schema definition.

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 first line states a precise action and resource: 'Create an FCoP project with a custom roster of roles.' This clearly distinguishes it from sibling initializers like init_solo and init_project, which create preset or solo setups.

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 tells the agent to run validate_team_config first to catch illegal role codes without writing anything, and recommends reading the closest preset as the next step. This gives actionable when-to-use guidance relative to sibling tools.

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