‹ BackHN Continuity

Thread

You said no MCP

682 points · 362 comments · yarapavan

  1. _fw · · focus · HN ↗
    I appreciate their reluctance towards MCP, but /something/ is better than nothing.

    It’s suboptimal for the reasons the author outlines: but so is USB-C. So is NVME, so is HDMI.

    We use these hugely successful technologies in spite of their flaws because they’re widely compatible and easy for the end user.

    That’s why MCP is everywhere. It might not be performant, robust and uniform but it WILL get better over time.

    And I’d much rather have the broad MCP ecosystem that we have now than seven or eight different “optimal” ways of plugging in an LLM to something useful.

    1. skohan · · focus · HN ↗
      You could already use MCP perfectly well on pi via extensions.

      I'm not so sure about this move, or the general inclusion of code mode in the core editor as one of pi's main selling points was its minimal nature.

      1. warmwaffles · · focus · HN ↗
        If Armin and Mario want, they can just as easily move this back into a package and make it an optional thing to support if they want. There was already a heavily used mcp adapter package that they appear to have just finally incorporated fully.

        Though as time progresses, they are probably going to do the same with sub-agents.

        1. skohan · · focus · HN ↗
          I think MTP is kind of ok, since it's a common protocol, but I think incorporating sub-agents could be a mis-step.

          There are a lot of ways to implement sub-agents, and it's not something I need the harness to be opinionated about.

          I know builtin tools support opt-out, but it's more bloat. It's also more complexity for the agent to understand when you use it to build extensions for itself.

Open on Hacker News to reply ↗

Unofficial Hacker News client; not affiliated with Y Combinator.