A group of MCP community members meets regularly to discuss and articulate a problem the protocol should address, but it has not yet produced any SEP or implementation. What kind of group is this in MCP governance?
Select an answer to reveal the explanation.
Short Explanation
Interest Groups are where you sharpen the question; Working Groups are where you build the answer. A group that's still defining the problem and hasn't shipped a SEP or code is an Interest Group. Mix those two up and this one gets you.
Full Explanation
MCP organizes collaboration around two structures. Interest Groups identify and articulate problems that MCP should address through open discussion, while Working Groups develop concrete solutions by producing deliverables such as SEPs or implementations. A group that is still framing a problem and has produced no deliverable fits the Interest Group description. Calling it a Working Group reverses the relationship, since Working Groups are defined by producing deliverables, and the governance model does not require an Interest Group to form after one. Core Maintainers steer the specification and the overall direction of the project and vote on proposals; they are not a community discussion forum, and the governance document does not make them responsible for defining every problem before a SEP can be written. The Steering Group is the combination of Maintainers, Core Maintainers and Lead Maintainers, so it is not made up of contributors lacking write access. Exam caveat: an Interest Group's discussion often feeds a Working Group or a SEP later, but the two structures have distinct purposes in the Working and Interest Groups documentation. Operational check: before joining or starting a group, read its charter to see whether it is chartered to discuss a problem space or to deliver a specific SEP or implementation.