←back to thread

237 points jdkee | 1 comments | | HN request time: 0.206s | source
Show context
whoknowsidont ◴[] No.45948637[source]
MCP was a really shitty attempt at building a plugin framework that was vague enough to lure people into and then allow other companies to build plugin platforms to take care of the MCP non-sense.

"What is MCP, what does it bring to the table? Who knows. What does it do? The LLM stuff! Pay us $10 a month thanks!"

LLM's have function / tool calling built into them. No major models have any direct knowledge of MCP.

Not only do you not need MCP, but you should actively avoid using it.

Stick with tried and proven API standards that are actually observable and secure and let your models/agents directly interact with those API endpoints.

replies(8): >>45948748 #>>45949815 #>>45950303 #>>45950716 #>>45950817 #>>45951274 #>>45951510 #>>45951951 #
jcelerier ◴[] No.45950817[source]
> LLM's have function / tool calling built into them. No major models have any direct knowledge of MCP.

but the major user interfaces for operating LLMs do and that's what matters

> Not only do you not need MCP, but you should actively avoid using it.

> Stick with tried and proven API standards that are actually observable and secure and let your models/agents directly interact with those API endpoints.

so what's the proven and standard API I can use to interact with ableton live? blender? unity3d? photoshop?

replies(1): >>45950829 #
whoknowsidont[dead post] ◴[] No.45950829[source]
[flagged]
nilslice ◴[] No.45951039[source]
What do all of the links below have in common? Do you know of another way you can control all of those applications via LLMs? Computer use?

https://github.com/ahujasid/ableton-mcp

https://github.com/ahujasid/blender-mcp

https://github.com/CoplayDev/unity-mcp

https://github.com/mikechambers/adb-mcp

replies(2): >>45951271 #>>45955037 #
growt ◴[] No.45951271[source]
The mcp part is not essential for the actual controlling of the applications. You could “rip out” the mcp functionality and replace it with something else. The only reason why the authors chose mcp is most likely that it was the first and therefore most common plugin interface for llm tools.
replies(3): >>45951322 #>>45951403 #>>45951426 #
1. Zetaphor ◴[] No.45951322[source]
Isn't that the point they are making? MCP is useful because everyone is using it, not because it has a technical advantage over rolling your own solution. It won mindshare because of marketing and a large company pushing it.

I've actually taken to both approaches recently, using the mcp-client package to give me an interface to a wide array of prebuilt tools in my non-LLM application. I could have written or sourced 10 different connectors, or I can write one client interface and any tool I plug in shares the same standard interface as all the others.