4 ms·

I think this article explains it all: MCP Isn’t the USB-C of AI — It’s Just a USB-Claude Dongle https://dev.to/internationale/mcp-is-not-ai-usb-c-its-usb-clau

by tb1989 2y ago

I think this article explains it all: MCP Isn’t the USB-C of AI — It’s Just a USB-Claude Dongle https://dev.to/internationale/mcp-is-not-ai-usb-c-its-usb-claude-dongle-4chg https://dev.to/internationale/mcp-is-not-ai-usb-c-its-usb-cl... Nonetheless, I think your work is very good and it looks like a very useful dongle

Leynos 2y ago
That article makes very little sense. The protocol itself sits on top of JSON-RPC, and the specifications are there for anyone to implement. There's nothing specific to Claude about it. There are various MCP client and server implementations available that are also unrelated to Anthropic.
- tb1989 2y ago
  - The official example strongly promotes the Anthropic API, which is on GitHub. This is clear evidence. - There is no clear explanation of the coupling between the system prompt and the tool call. Even if it mentions the open source Gemma or Deepseek, it would be much better. The official attitude makes it difficult to trust this project. The point you made is exactly the cunning part. Anyone can copy it, but without official support, it is simply impossible: this is pure community exploitation
  - Leynos 2y ago
    If you want an LLM to use a tool, you just need to implement a parser in your LLM client that extracts the tool call from the LLM's response, then give the LLM a syntax it can use to make the tool call. For example, in Roo Code: ``` TOOL USE You have access to a set of tools that are executed upon the user's approval. You can use one tool per message, and will receive the result of that tool use in the user's response. You use tools step-by-step to accomplish a given task, with each tool use informed by the result of the previous tool use. # Tool Use Formatting Tool use is formatted using XML-style tags. The tool name is enclosed in opening and closing tags, and each parameter is similarly enclosed within its own set of tags. Here's the structure: <tool_name> <parameter1_name>value1</parameter1_name> <parameter2_name>value2</parameter2_name> ... </tool_name> For example: <read_file> <path>src/main.js</path> </read_file> Always adhere to this format for the tool use to ensure proper parsing and execution. ```
zipy124 2y ago
I'm not even sure comparing it to USB is helpful, since USB is just a transport protocol, not communication protocol. Just because two devices have usb ports doesn't mean they can be connected together, otherwise we wouldn't need device drivers. So in this instance it's more of a unified device driver, rather than a port.
- tb1989 2y ago
  I totally agree. As someone with an EE background, this metaphor makes me a little physically uncomfortable. Considering that the developers and users of mcp are almost all programmers who need to use cli, I really don't understand why they don't tell the truth to programmers.

by tb1989 2y ago

Leynos 2y ago

That article makes very little sense. The protocol itself sits on top of JSON-RPC, and the specifications are there for anyone to implement. There's nothing specific to Claude about it. There are various MCP client and server implementations available that are also unrelated to Anthropic.

tb1989 2y ago
- The official example strongly promotes the Anthropic API, which is on GitHub. This is clear evidence. - There is no clear explanation of the coupling between the system prompt and the tool call. Even if it mentions the open source Gemma or Deepseek, it would be much better. The official attitude makes it difficult to trust this project. The point you made is exactly the cunning part. Anyone can copy it, but without official support, it is simply impossible: this is pure community exploitation
- Leynos 2y ago
  If you want an LLM to use a tool, you just need to implement a parser in your LLM client that extracts the tool call from the LLM's response, then give the LLM a syntax it can use to make the tool call. For example, in Roo Code: ``` TOOL USE You have access to a set of tools that are executed upon the user's approval. You can use one tool per message, and will receive the result of that tool use in the user's response. You use tools step-by-step to accomplish a given task, with each tool use informed by the result of the previous tool use. # Tool Use Formatting Tool use is formatted using XML-style tags. The tool name is enclosed in opening and closing tags, and each parameter is similarly enclosed within its own set of tags. Here's the structure: <tool_name> <parameter1_name>value1</parameter1_name> <parameter2_name>value2</parameter2_name> ... </tool_name> For example: <read_file> <path>src/main.js</path> </read_file> Always adhere to this format for the tool use to ensure proper parsing and execution. ```

zipy124 2y ago

I'm not even sure comparing it to USB is helpful, since USB is just a transport protocol, not communication protocol. Just because two devices have usb ports doesn't mean they can be connected together, otherwise we wouldn't need device drivers. So in this instance it's more of a unified device driver, rather than a port.

tb1989 2y ago
I totally agree. As someone with an EE background, this metaphor makes me a little physically uncomfortable. Considering that the developers and users of mcp are almost all programmers who need to use cli, I really don't understand why they don't tell the truth to programmers.