Remix.run Logo
ambicapter 15 hours ago

If AI is AI, why does it need a protocol to figure out how to interact with HTTP, FTP, etc.? MCP is a way to quickly get those integrations up and running, but purely because the underlying technology has not lived up to its hyped abilities so far. That's why people think of MCP as a band-aid fix.

8note 14 hours ago | parent | next [-]

Why the desire to reinvent the wheel every time? Agents can do it accurately, but you have to wait for them to figure it out every time, and waste tokens on non-differentiated work

The agents are writing the mcps, so they can figure out those http and ftp calls. MCP makes it so they dont have to every time they want to do something.

I wouldnt hire a new person to read a manual and then make a bespoke json to call an http server, every single time i want to make a call, and thats not a knock on the person's intelligence. Its just a waste of time doing the same work over and over again. I want the results of calling the API, not to spend all my time figuring out how to call the API

theptip 14 hours ago | parent [-]

It’s simply about making standard, centralized plugins available. Right now Claude benefits from a “link GitHub Connector” button with a clear manifest of actions.

Obviously if the self-modifying, Clawd-native development thing catches on, any old API will work. (Preferably documented but that’s not a hard requirement.)

For now though, Anthropic doesn’t host a clawd for you, so there isn’t yet a good way for it to persist customs integrations.

avereveard 14 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

C

each ai need context management per conversation this is something that would be very clunky to replicate on top of http or ftp (as in requiring side channel information due session and conversation management)

Everyone looks at api and sure mcp seem redundant there but look at agent driving a browser the get dom method depends on all the action performed from when the window opened and it needs to be per agent per conversation

Can you do that as rest sure sneak a session and conversation in a parameter or cookie but then the protocol is not really just http is it it's all this clunky coupling that comes with a side of unknowns like when is a conversation finished did the client terminate or were just between messages and as you go and solve these for the hundredth time you'd start itching for standardization

superturkey650 13 hours ago | parent [-]

All MCP adds is a session token. How is that not already a solved problem?

avereveard 7 hours ago | parent [-]

P

It makes it part of the protocol so the llm doesn't have to handle it, which is brittle

And look at the patent post I've replied to choice of protocol, I'd like to see a session token over ftp where you need to track the current folder per conversation.

0xbadcafebee 5 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

You mean, why not ask the AI to "find a way to use FTP", including either using a tool, or writing its own code? Besides the security issues?

One simple reason is "determinism". If you ask the AI to "just figure it out", it will do that in different ways and you won't have a reliable experience. The protocol provides AI a way to do this without guessing or working in different ways, because the server does all the work, deterministically.

But the second reason is, all the other reasons. There is a lot in the specification, that the AI literally cannot figure out, because it would require custom integration with every application and system. MCP is also a client/server distributed system, which "calling a tool" is not, so it does stuff that is impossible to do on your existing system, without setting up a whole other system... a system like MCP. And all this applies to both the clients, and the servers.

Here's another way to think of it. The AI is a psychopath in prison. You want the psycho to pick up your laundry. Do you hand the psycho the keys to your car? Or do you hand him a phone, where he can call someone who is in charge of your car? Now the psycho doesn't need to know how to drive a car, and he can't drive it off a bridge. All he can do is talk to your driver and tell him where to go. And your driver will definitely not drive off a bridge or stab anyone. And this works for planes, trains, boats, etc, just by adding a phone in between.

CharlieDigital 15 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Because protocols provide structure that increases correctness.

It is not a guarantee (as we see with structured output schemas), but it significantly increases compliance.

ambicapter 15 hours ago | parent [-]

You're interacting with an LLM, so correctness is already out the window. So model-makers train LLMs to work better with MCP to increase correctness. So the only reason correctness is increased with MCP is because LLMs are specifically trained against it.

So why MCP? Are there other protocols that will provide more correctness when trained? Have we tried? Maybe a protocol that offers more compression of commands will overall take up more context, thus offering better correctness.

MCP seems arbitrary as a protocol, because it kinda is. It doesn't >>cause<< the increase in correctness in of itself, the fact that it >>is<< a protocol is the reason it may increase correctness. Thus, any other protocol would do the same thing.

fartfeatures 15 hours ago | parent | next [-]

> You're interacting with an LLM, so correctness is already out the window.

With all due respect if you are prompting correctly and following approaches such as TDD / extensive testing then correctness is not out the window. That is a misunderstanding likely caused by older versions of these models.

Correctness can be as complete as any other new code, I've used the AI to port algorithms from Python to Rust which I've then tested against math oracles and published examples. Not only can I check my code mathematically but in several instances I've found and fixed subtle bugs upstream. Even in well reviewed code that has been around for many years and is well used. It is simply a tool.

CharlieDigital 15 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

    > So why MCP? ...  MCP seems arbitrary as a protocol
You're right, it is an arbitrary protocol, but it's one that is supported by the industry.

See the screencaps at the end of the post that show why this protocol. Maybe one day, we will get a better protocol. But that day is not today; today we have MCP.

nonethewiser 15 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

If AI is AI why does it need me to prompt it?

re-thc 13 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

> If AI is AI

That "AI" got renamed to "AGI"