4 ms·

MCP servers are basically a tool call registries, how could it be worse than a regular tool call?

by kobalsky 1y ago

behnamoh 1y ago
an MCP server can run code outside of the domain of tools that it supports, tool call can't
- TeMPOraL 1y ago
  Tools are literally function calls with extra steps. MCPs are interpreters of those function calls. Same stuff, different name - only thing that's changed is that Anthropic got people to agree on RPC protocol. It's not like it's a new idea, either. MCP isn't much different from SOAP or DCOM - but it works where the older approaches didn't, because LLMs are able to understand API definitions and natural-language documentation, and then map between those APIs (and user input) on the fly.
  - brazukadev 1y ago
    > MCPs are interpreters of those function calls. No, tool calls are just one of many MCP parts. People thinking MCP = SOAP or DCOM or JSON-RPC or OpenAPI didn't stop 20 minutes to read and understand MCP. Tool calls is 20% of MCP, at maximum. And a good amount of it is dynamically generating the tool list exposed to LLMs. But lots of people here think MCP === give the model 50 tools to choose from
    - simonw 1y ago
      "Tool calls is 20% of MCP, at maximum" What else is there? I know about resources and prompts but I've seen almost no evidence of people actually using them, as far as I can tell tools are 90% of the usage of MCP, if not more.
      - brazukadev 1y ago
        It is funny most people discussing here does not understand MCP at all. Besides tools, MCP has resources, prompts, sampling, elicitation, roots and each one of them is useful when creating apps connected to LLMs. MCP is not only about MCP Servers, the host/client part is as important as the servers/tools. For example, nowadays most LLM clients are chatbots, but an MCP client could be a chess game or a project management app. > I know about resources and prompts but I've seen almost no evidence of people actually using them these are features that MCP clients should implement and unfortunately, most of them still don't. The same for elicitation and sampling. Prompts, for example, are mostly useful when you use sampling, then you can create an agent from an MCP server.
        tptacek 1y ago
        What can I do with MCP that I can't do with the function calling interface in the OpenAI Responses API? Besides, obviously, grafting function calls into agents I didn't write; we all understand that's the value prop of MCP. But you're suggesting it's more than that. Fill in the blanks for us.
        brazukadev 1y ago
        The LLM can only use MCP tools, but the Client you use the model can access resources, prompts, elicitation and sampling, which are tools to help with querying the model. So one MCP server that implements some or all these features can act as an agent for the LLM dispatching tasks IF the client is also an MCP host/client.
        ming030890 1y ago
        But most of these can really be just a tool. For example, A resource can be just a getter tool, like getFile.
        tptacek 1y ago
        Right. My understanding of these APIs and model capabilities is imperfect, but at the level I interact with them at, there are only two things: prompts (more broadly: context chunks) and tool calls. I don't see how MCP could meaningfully expand that; it seems like anything I could do with MCP, I could do with context chunks and tool calls --- perhaps better, because I'd have finer-grained control of both security and of context management.

MCP servers are basically a tool call registries, how could it be worse than a regular tool call?

behnamoh 1y ago

an MCP server can run code outside of the domain of tools that it supports, tool call can't

TeMPOraL 1y ago
Tools are literally function calls with extra steps. MCPs are interpreters of those function calls. Same stuff, different name - only thing that's changed is that Anthropic got people to agree on RPC protocol. It's not like it's a new idea, either. MCP isn't much different from SOAP or DCOM - but it works where the older approaches didn't, because LLMs are able to understand API definitions and natural-language documentation, and then map between those APIs (and user input) on the fly.
- brazukadev 1y ago
  > MCPs are interpreters of those function calls. No, tool calls are just one of many MCP parts. People thinking MCP = SOAP or DCOM or JSON-RPC or OpenAPI didn't stop 20 minutes to read and understand MCP. Tool calls is 20% of MCP, at maximum. And a good amount of it is dynamically generating the tool list exposed to LLMs. But lots of people here think MCP === give the model 50 tools to choose from
  - simonw 1y ago
    "Tool calls is 20% of MCP, at maximum" What else is there? I know about resources and prompts but I've seen almost no evidence of people actually using them, as far as I can tell tools are 90% of the usage of MCP, if not more.
    - brazukadev 1y ago
      It is funny most people discussing here does not understand MCP at all. Besides tools, MCP has resources, prompts, sampling, elicitation, roots and each one of them is useful when creating apps connected to LLMs. MCP is not only about MCP Servers, the host/client part is as important as the servers/tools. For example, nowadays most LLM clients are chatbots, but an MCP client could be a chess game or a project management app. > I know about resources and prompts but I've seen almost no evidence of people actually using them these are features that MCP clients should implement and unfortunately, most of them still don't. The same for elicitation and sampling. Prompts, for example, are mostly useful when you use sampling, then you can create an agent from an MCP server.
      - tptacek 1y ago
        What can I do with MCP that I can't do with the function calling interface in the OpenAI Responses API? Besides, obviously, grafting function calls into agents I didn't write; we all understand that's the value prop of MCP. But you're suggesting it's more than that. Fill in the blanks for us.
        brazukadev 1y ago
        The LLM can only use MCP tools, but the Client you use the model can access resources, prompts, elicitation and sampling, which are tools to help with querying the model. So one MCP server that implements some or all these features can act as an agent for the LLM dispatching tasks IF the client is also an MCP host/client.
        ming030890 1y ago
        But most of these can really be just a tool. For example, A resource can be just a getter tool, like getFile.
        tptacek 1y ago
        Right. My understanding of these APIs and model capabilities is imperfect, but at the level I interact with them at, there are only two things: prompts (more broadly: context chunks) and tool calls. I don't see how MCP could meaningfully expand that; it seems like anything I could do with MCP, I could do with context chunks and tool calls --- perhaps better, because I'd have finer-grained control of both security and of context management.