←back to thread

133 points wirehack | 6 comments | | HN request time: 0s | source | bottom

Hey HN! We are Klavis AI (https://www.klavis.ai/) and we're launching Strata, one open-source MCP server that helps AI agents use thousands of API tools without getting overwhelmed. Instead of showing all available tools at once, Strata reveals them step-by-step based on what the AI actually needs.

As a former Senior SWE on Google Gemini 's tool use team, I saw firsthand how AI would struggle with tools. If you've built AI agents, you've likely hit the same walls: (1) AI agents struggle to pick the right API from hundreds of options. (2) Tool descriptions and info consume massive token budgets. (3) Most servers cap at 40~50 tools to avoid these problems, limiting what you can build.

Instead of flooding the AI with everything upfront, Strata works like a human would. It guides the AI agents to discover relevant categories, then lists available actions in those categories. It relies on LLMs’ reasoning to drill down progressively to find the exact tool needed. Here are some examples:

Github query: "Find my stale pull requests in our main repo"

Strata: AI model identifies GitHub → Shows categories (Repos, Issues, PRs, Actions) → AI selects PRs → Shows PR-specific actions -> AI selects list_pull_requests → Shows list_pull_requests details -> Executes list_pull_requests with the right parameters.

Jira query: "Create a bug ticket in the 'MOBILE' project about the app crashing on startup."

Strata: AI identifies Jira → Shows categories (Projects, Issues, Sprints) → AI selects Issues → Shows actions (create_issue, get_issue) → AI selects create_issue → Shows create_issue details → Executes with correct parameters.

Slack query: "Post a message in the #announcements channel that bonus will be paid out next Friday."

Strata: AI identifies Slack → Shows categories (Channels, Messages, Users) → AI selects Messages → Shows actions (send_message, schedule_message) → AI selects send_message → Shows send_message details → Executes with correct parameters.

This progressive approach unlocks a huge advantage: depth. While most integrations offer a handful of high-level tools, Strata can expose hundreds of granular features for a single app like GitHub, Jira, etc. Your AI agent can finally access the deep, specific features that real workflows require, without getting lost in a sea of options.

Under the hood, Strata manages authentication tokens and includes a built-in search tool for the agent to dig into documentation if it gets stuck.

On the MCPMark https://mcpmark.ai/leaderboard/mcp, Strata achieves +15.2% higher pass@1 rate vs the official GitHub server and +13.4% higher pass@1 rate vs the official Notion server. In human eval tests, it hits 83%+ accuracy on complex, real-world multi-app workflows.

Here is a quick demo to watch Strata navigate a complex workflow with multiple apps, automatically selecting the right tools at each step: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N00cY9Ov_fM.

You can connect to any external MCP Server into Strata, and we have an open source version for it: https://github.com/Klavis-AI/klavis.

For team or production use with more features, visit our website: https://www.klavis.ai. Add Strata to Cursor, VS Code or any MCP-compatible application with one click. You can also use our API to easily plug in Strata to your AI application.

We look forward to your comments. Thanks for reading!

1. nycdatasci ◴[] No.45349664[source]
The attack surface for agents with MCP access grows exponentially with the number of tools. On the scale of thousands of tools, I think it's nearly impossible to understand potential interactions and risk. Do you have any innovative controls in place that would help a CISO get comfortable with a product like this in an enterprise context?
replies(2): >>45349723 #>>45349730 #
2. wirehack ◴[] No.45349723[source]
That's the critical question. The key is that Strata never exposes all tools to the agent at once. Our progressive guidance acts as a dynamic allowlist, so that the agent only "sees" the specific tools relevant to its immediate task. This fundamentally reduces the blast radius at each step. We do provide a comprehensive audit trails for every action, giving a CISO a centralized control plane to manage and monitor agent capabilities, rather than an exponential risk. If you are interested, come talk to us!
replies(1): >>45349852 #
3. smrtinsert ◴[] No.45349730[source]
this. This will be the number one obstacle to adoption.
4. daveidol ◴[] No.45349852[source]
How is a “dynamic allowlist” useful if it can still access anything based on what the user prompts? Is there a way to impose a static allowlist too?
replies(1): >>45349871 #
5. wirehack ◴[] No.45349871{3}[source]
Yes there is a way to impose a static allowlist. As a very simple example, you can disable certain servers completely via the UI or the API.
replies(1): >>45357500 #
6. nativeit ◴[] No.45357500{4}[source]
Isn’t that a blocklist?