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.

> 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?

> MCP was a really shitty attempt at building a plugin framework

Can you go more in depth? The protocol is relatively simple, what about it you feel is "shitty" as a plugin framework?

Fully agree, however we need to reach our KPIs and OKRs regarding AI adoption.

Perhaps you haven't used many MCP server, but those that I have used (GitHub, Atlassian, Glean, BuildKite, Figma, Google Workspace, etc) work very well. They teach an LLM how to do exactly what you're saying - "use the API standards...your models/agents directly interact with those API endpoints." Most MCP severs don't sit in between the LLM and the API endpoints, they just teach them how to use the tools and then the LLM calls the APIs directly as any HTTP client would. I find it works quite well and seems far better than manually maintaining rules or pointing at docs and installing CLI tools (like "gh" for GitHub) or using curl to interact with APIs from a terminal within a chat session.

MCP is an example of "worse is better". Everyone knows that it's not very good, but it gets the job done.

probably easier to just tell people: You want MCP? Add a "description" field to your rest API that describes how to call it.

That's all it's doing. Just plain ole context pollution. World could be better served by continuing to build out the APIs that exist.

> No major models have any direct knowledge of MCP.

Claude and ChatGPT both support MCP, as does the OpenAI Agents SDK.

(If you mean the LLM itself, it is "known" at least as much as any other protocol. For whatever that means.)

Yeah there's no there there when it comes to MCP. It's crazy to me that the world bought into the idea when the "spec" literally boils down to "have your server give the LLM some json". Just illustrates how powerful it is to attach names to things, especially in a hypestorm in which everyone is already frothing at the mouth and reason is hard to come by. Give people some word they can utter to help them sound like they're on the "bleeding edge" and they'll buy into it even if it's totally pointless.