What are the advantages of using an environment that doesn't have access to a CLI, only having to run/maintain your own server, or pay someone else to maintain that server, so AI has access to tools? Can't you just use AI in the said server?

▲

daemonologist 3 hours ago | parent | next [-]

Obvious example is a corporate chatbot (if it's using tools, probably for internal use). Non-technical users might be accessing it from a phone or locked-down corporate device, and you probably don't want to run a CLI in a sandbox somewhere for every session, so you'd like the LLM to interface with some kind of API instead.

Although, I think MCP is not really appropriate for this either. (And frankly I don't think chatbots make for good UX, but management sure likes them.)

▲

nostrebored 2 hours ago | parent [-]

Why are they not calling APIs directly with strictly defined inputs and outputs like every other internal application?

The story for MCP just makes no sense, especially in an enterprise.

▲

ok_dad 2 hours ago | parent | next [-]

MCP is an API with strictly defined inputs and outputs.

	▲	nostrebored 2 hours ago \| parent [-]
		This is obviously not what it is. If I give you APIGW would you be able to implement an MCP server with full functionality without a large amount of middleware?

▲

woeirua an hour ago | parent | prev [-]

MCP really only makes sense for chatbots that don’t want to have per session runtime environments. In that context, MCP makes perfect sense. It’s just an adapter between an LLM and an API. If you have access to an execution engine, then yes CLI + skills is superior.

▲

DrJokepu 3 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

The advantage is that I can have it in my pocket.

	▲	Aperocky 2 hours ago \| parent [-]
		gateway agent is a thing for many months now (and I don't mean openclaw, that's grown into a disaster security wise). There are good, minimal gateway agents today that can fit in your pocket.