‹ BackHN Continuity

Thread

You said no MCP

682 points · 362 comments · yarapavan

  1. wren6991 · · focus · HN ↗
    > And while we could have just wired up the metadata to enable better MCP extensions, we also think that MCP with Codemode solves quite a few of the issues that it traditionally had.

    There's just something that bothers me about this. Normally if LLMs want to compose multiple operations, they have the perfect tool for this: bash, or whatever other OS shell is available. It's why I was always confused by Codemode-type constructs for direct chaining of tool calls; see also the way highly-RL'd modern models will fall back to sed or python for complex file edits.

    It seems like Codemode is raised here as the perfect tool for chaining or composing MCPs, but isn't that backwards? LLMs are already given the perfect tool for that, and the problem is that MCPs aren't exposed to that tool.

    1. pjmlp · · focus · HN ↗
      Cloud products based orchestrations with proper security mechanisms configured, don't have shell access and should only communicate over proper network mechanisms.

      Rootless immutable containers without shell access, or SaaS products from multiple vendors with WebAPIs as the only touch point.

      1. wren6991 · · focus · HN ↗
        Yeah, I'm probably over-indexing on local use cases due to my own preferences, prejudices, biases etc. For a coding agent like Pi it does seem reasonable to expect some kind of shell access though, unless some people are using it as a CLI chat client with MCP?
Open on Hacker News to reply ↗

Unofficial Hacker News client; not affiliated with Y Combinator.