‹ 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    Thinking MCP is obsolete because full coding agents don't need it misses out on all of the other things we might want to build.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. pragma_x · · focus · HN ↗
      As someone who has never used MCP, or allowed an AI to directly talk to APIs, putting something between a model and a service just seems like common sense. If nothing else, it presents an opportunity to tightly control what the AI is allowed to do with external services, especially if the MCP code is outside of the AI's context. I would go as far as to say it's a necessary security measure.
      1. dominotw · · focus · HN ↗
        well if you realease an api you should make sure its usable for ai out of box without 'something in between'. You should always assume ai might be directly calling your api.
        1. Tractor8626 · · focus · HN ↗
          Ai can't use any api out of box. It requires thing called "harness" to use anything.
Open on Hacker News to reply ↗

Unofficial Hacker News client; not affiliated with Y Combinator.