4 ms·
strong agree with this -- I don't understand outside of integration with Claude Desktop why to use MCP rather than a dedicated API endpoint.
by nostrebored 2y ago
strong agree with this -- I don't understand outside of integration with Claude Desktop why to use MCP rather than a dedicated API endpoint.
- gregpr07 2y agoWhat’s your take - how can we expose Browser Use to as many use cases as possible? Is there easier way than openapi config?
- elyase 2y agoI want to use browser-use in Cursor but I am using another option because it doesn't support MCP integration which is the common language they support for external tools
- fallinditch 2y agoI believe MCP helps here because it standardizes integrations, enhances user control via opt-in plugins, and improves security by avoiding direct endpoint calls. @gregpr07 wouldn't adoption of MCP open up Browser-use to more use cases?
- gregpr07 2y agoIt probably would yeah. I was very against it but this HN post sorta points me to “people want mcp”
- anonzzzies 2y agoHmm, I don't mean this negatively, but MCP is mentioned only in this thread and 2 comments up you say 'I thought about this a lot' and now you are convinced based on 2 people saying they would like it? Isn't standardising something people want always? And MCP seems to have easily won that 'battle' user wise -> what have you been thinking about exactly?
- nsonha 2y agoas building blocks we of course prefer APIs. However, interfacing directly with the browser (or desktop) can enable end users to do way more things without having integration built by devs, in theory at least. In reality, LLM may not have reached that point yet and there are security concerns.