> ...because, its obviously not any better than the 'tool use' API that everyone was already using. It can't be. It doesn't do anything differently. Instead of

> ...because, its obviously not any better than the 'tool use' API that everyone was already using. It can't be. It doesn't do anything differently. Instead of you writing tool use code (which requires you to know how to write code, and to put in the effort), you spin up a server that provides that tool use code for the LLM. As an example, you could hook up an "email" MCP that connects to your email provider and provides a "get_unread" tool and a "send_email" tool, and then go nuts having a chat with your LLM saying "hey let's work through our unread emails, bring up the first and then come up with a draft response for it, for me to review before sending". Hook it up with the "linear" MCP, and tell the LLM to also raise tickets with all the relevant details in your project management tool. Of course you could write those tools yourself, and control all of the prompting, etc, but the point of MCP is so you don't have to write anything. That's the ELI5, I think. "pre-built tools for the tool use API".