logoalt Hacker News

tptacekyesterday at 10:25 PM3 repliesview on HN

Why is this the right way to go? It's not solving the problem it looks like it's solving. If your challenge is that you need to communicate with a foreign API, the obvious solution to that is a progressively discoverable CLI or API specification --- the normal tool developers use.

The reason we have MCP is because early agent designs couldn't run arbitrary CLIs. Once you can run commands, MCP becomes silly.

There is a clear problem that you'd like an "automatic" solution for, but it's not "we don't have a standard protocol that captures every possible API shape", it's "we need a good way to simulate what a CLI does for agents that can't run bash".


Replies

harrallyesterday at 11:07 PM

CLI doesn’t work for your coworkers that aren’t technical.

Have you tried to use a random API before? It’s a process of trial and error.

With the MCP tools I use, it works the first time and every time. There is no “figuring out.”

show 1 reply
oneseventwoninetoday at 12:06 AM

For the Agent to use CLI, don't we have to install CLI in the run-time environment first? Instead for the MCP over streamable HTTP we don't have to install anything and just specify the tool call in the context in't it?

show 1 reply
isbvhodnvemrwvnyesterday at 10:32 PM

It's significantly more difficult to secure random clis than those apis. All llm tools today bypass their ignore files by running commands their harness can't control.

show 1 reply