MCP Community Working Group repository
Welcome to the Model Context Protocol (MCP) Community Working Group (CWG) Repository.
[!NOTE] This repository is for collaboration among MCP CWG members.
If you are not part of the MCP CWG Discord, you are probably in the wrong place.
General questions and discussions on MCP should be conducted in the appropriate official Model Context Protocol repositories.
The MCP CWG community is for MCP community members who have been using and engaging with MCP, and want to contribute to advancing the procotol by contributing specification improvements, conventions, and best practices.
To get started:
A common route to generating a high quality contribution to the Specification will be to
working-groups
repositoryAll content added to this repository is contributed under the MIT License.
If you are unsure if you are able to include content under that license, please contact one of the group administrators for advice.
Working Groups normally have 2 complimentary goals:
[!IMPORTANT] All participants within the Working Group agree to the MCP Code of Conduct
See channels in Discord under the category Community Working Groups
.
MCP serves as an enabler for innovative LLM application development, providing interoperability without being prescriptive about application design. The protocol consists of four main components:
Each component serves a different purpose:
This layered approach allows MCP to provide standardization where needed while encouraging innovation and flexibility in application design. Working Groups play a crucial role in balancing these priorities, contributing to all layers while respecting their different purposes and impact scopes.
The barrier for specification changes is intentionally high due to the cascading impact on implementers. Changes should be:
Cascading Impact Principle: Changes at higher layers in the MCP hierarchy necessitate corresponding updates in lower layers. This cascading effect is why there are different barriers to change - the higher in the stack, the more widespread the impact.
Artifact Type | When to Update | Barrier to Change |
---|---|---|
Specification | Only when necessary to enable core functionality or address critical limitations that impact the feasibility or viability of implementations across the ecosystem | High - requires demonstrated community need and proven implementation examples |
Reference SDKs - Specification Alignment | When necessary to maintain compliance with specification changes or to implement standardized patterns across all SDK languages | High - requires strict adherence to the specification, interoperability testing and cross-SDK consistency |
Reference SDKs - Language-Specific Innovations | When implementing idiomatic patterns, optimizations, or extensions that improve developer experience within a specific language ecosystem | Medium - requires demonstrated utility within the language community while maintaining specification compliance |
Supporting Resources | To improve onboarding experience, clarify implementation guidance, or document new patterns that emerge from the community | Medium - requires validation from multiple implementers |
Working Group artifacts | To share emerging patterns, experimental approaches, and implementation guidance that may eventually influence higher layers | Low - encourages innovation and collaboration |
Working Groups should assess whether a proposed change is best suited as:
Working groups should favor evolutionary improvement through:
Working Groups have open membership, and often span multiple topics. We want to make sure that all who wish to contribute have the right forums and opportunities to do so.
The ground rules are intended to facilitate this without being too formal.
Working Groups provide the organizational structure, while Topic Areas represent specific problems being addressed:
Example: The Hosting Working Group contains Topic Areas like "Multi-Tenancy" and "Scaling Patterns," each with their own participation and cadence based on current implementation needs.
Topic Area | Typical Approach | Community Focus |
---|---|---|
Agent Interaction Patterns | Exploratory research with proof-of-concept implementations | Understanding emerging patterns before standardization |
Regulatory Compliance Requirements | Structured development with defined milestones | Meeting industry deadlines while ensuring protocol compatibility |
Container Deployment Configurations | Collaborative documentation of tested implementations | Sharing practical hosting solutions across environments |
Working groups should aim for consensus-driven decisions:
Working Group activities are separated into two distinct types of discussions:
Process Meetings focus on coordination, planning, and governance:
Content Meetings focus on the technical substance:
Process Example | Content Example |
---|---|
Scheduling technical deep-dive sessions with subject matter experts | Developing best practices for securing transport connections |
Establishing guidelines for reviewing working group artifacts | Creating reference configurations for cloud hosting environments |
Coordinating the roadmap for specification change proposals | Designing patterns for error handling across transport types |
Agreeing timelines and expected outputs for the working group | Evaluating proposed protocol extensions with proof-of-concept |
Topic Area facilitators help arrange necessary meetings and coordinate group discussions. Facilitators ensure that:
Working groups are more productive when members focus on interests rather than positions. This distinction comes from principled negotiation techniques:
Position (Less Helpful) | Interest (More Helpful) |
---|---|
"We must implement vendor X's authentication protocol in the specification" | "We need a secure authentication method that works well with our existing systems" |
"The specification should mandate encrypted communication channels" | "We need to ensure data privacy for regulated industries" |
"Transport Y is the only acceptable solution for high-performance scenarios" | "We need transport options that can handle high-throughput, low-latency requirements" |
"The MCP SDK must support language Z" | "Our development team needs accessible tooling that works with our technology stack" |
Working Groups should also maintain a strong focus on addressing concrete problems faced by MCP implementers. All proposals should clearly articulate "What specific problem does this solve?" including examples of real-world implementation challenges.
When discussions focus on interests and validated problems:
Example of position vs. interest: Instead of arguing "We must implement AWS-specific authentication", share "Our organization has invested heavily in AWS IAM and need compatible authentication options." This reveals the actual need without prescribing a single solution.
Example of problem validation: For a proposal about tool namespacing and search capabilities, validation would include specific examples of current approaches to tool organization from community members, including where existing methods fall short. This should also include any available data or metrics quantifying the impact on reliable and efficient tool usage.
Working groups benefit from open sharing of expertise and experience, but should avoid promotional marketing:
✅ Acceptable Sharing:
❌ Unacceptable Marketing:
Multiple voices from a single entity have less weight than single voices from multiple entities.
Example: A large team from Galactic Hosting Corporation joining a working group meeting to advocate a specific position, leaving no room for others to speak.
Working groups enable diverse participation through multiple contribution channels:
When using AI for generating meeting notes or transcription, we recommend that groups agree on a single tool to avoid adding noise or raising privacy concerns. For example, the Hosting Working Group only uses Gemini for meeting transcription and summarization, where transcriptions are only shared among WG members.
If this sounds like you—or something you'd like to try—get in touch!
No configuration available
Related projects feature coming soon
Will recommend related projects based on sub-categories