> 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?

▲

whoknowsidont 5 hours ago | parent [-]

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

Do you think MCP helps you out here? Because I can't really think of any other reason why'd you ask this.

▲

nilslice 4 hours ago | parent [-]

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

▲

growt 3 hours ago | parent [-]

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.

	▲	TranquilMarmot 2 hours ago \| parent \| next [-]
		Unfortunately, most standards that we end up with are only standard because they're are widely used and not because they are the best or they make the most sense.
	▲	theshrike79 2 hours ago \| parent \| prev \| next [-]
		MCP literally is the "something else", if you have a better idea in mind, now is the time to bring it out before the MCP train is going too fast to catch up.
	▲	Zetaphor 3 hours ago \| parent \| prev [-]
		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.