14 ms·

Maybe I just need more patience, but I took a look at some tools that have MCPs, and their "setup guide" on how to start using the MCP server really gave me bra

• anon84873628 25d ago
  For antiquated "enterprise" APIs that were already a mess of legacy cruft, yes. MCP forced vendors to reconsider the ergonomics of their interface.
  • nostrebored 25d ago
    What do you mean by this? It certainly sounds technical but it seems to not mean anything. MCP has not smoothed over legacy cruft, and it is generally bad at exactly what you’re describing (many unintentionally coupled APIs with unintentional side effects). These require near deterministic trajectories and you’d be better off creating a consumer with a series of well known good patterns with useful results. If you take it a step further you may allow for a common language and keyspace of these well known results and employ dynamic solvers that are entirely agnostic. LLMs have made creating these much easier!
    • anon84873628 25d ago
      Of course MCP can still be implemented poorly by just making a 1:1 clone of the existing API. But there are also folks who put thought into omitting extraneous fields, combining multiple low-level calls into a single tool that covers a common end-to-end use case, and writing much better documentation. With the political air cover that it is in service of the AI boom. Essentially it gave everyone the opportunity to implement API vN+1.