‹ BackHN Continuity

Thread

MCP was always a bad idea?

335 points · 331 comments · maharshi365

  1. simonw · · focus · HN ↗
    This article entirely misses the value that MCP brings today.

    Sure, there's almost no reason to use MCPs if you are running a full-blown terminal agent (Claude Code, Codex, Meta Muse, OpenClaw etc) with unfettered internet access - just let it call APIs directly.

    If you want to operate something that's less YOLO than that, you'll find yourself wanting:

    1. Control over exactly which external services it can access

    2. A way to handle authentication that doesn't allow the agent to directly access API keys

    3. A sensible UI to allow users to connect and authenticate further services

    4. Strong audit logging for what's going on

    MCP makes all of that so much easier to provide.

    Thinking MCP is obsolete because full coding agents don't need it misses out on all of the other things we might want to build.

    1. seanhunter · · focus · HN ↗
      Exactly. There are so many replies here of the form “MCP sucks. If you just do <all the things mcp does a different way> you don’t need mcp at all.”

      Well yes.

      1. lelanthran · · focus · HN ↗
        > Exactly. There are so many replies here of the form “MCP sucks. If you just do <all the things mcp does a different way> you don’t need mcp at all.”

        See my previous reply to simonw elsethread.

        It's not "If you just do <all the things mcp does a different way> you don’t need mcp at all", it's that many of us were already doing that in a CLI prior to LLMs. You think only github and amazon had CLI clients?

Open on Hacker News to reply ↗

Unofficial Hacker News client; not affiliated with Y Combinator.