2 ms·
CLI still has the possibility of being a little more token efficient, at worst it may use graphql behind the scenes. For our company, we advertise the graphql
by mattkrick 17d ago
CLI still has the possibility of being a little more token efficient, at worst it may use graphql behind the scenes.
For our company, we advertise the graphql schema to bots and they can one-shot whatever task they're trying to do. I've found that it's so good that I cancelled building an an MCP server and any skill. Just a well documented GQL schema. It's pretty remarkable.
- saasrivals 16d ago[flagged]
- enormousness 16d agoI think you might also have a GQL schema that's particularly well suited to what those bots need. Either that or your backend schema is relatively simple and the GQL schema covers all its possible data compositions.
- agentdev001 16d ago> "I've found that it's so good that I cancelled building an an MCP server and any skill. Just a well documented GQL schema. It's pretty remarkable." This gave me a chuckle, there's some subtle irony here- especially if the documentation of the GQL schema was work that needed to be done!
- mattkrick 16d agoThat's completely fair, I did spend a day or 2 having AI rewrite the field descriptions based on the code. for bots, by bots!
- shrx 16d agoCan you provide an example of this schema?
- mattkrick 16d agohttps://action.parabol.co/graphql/schema.graphql https://action.parabol.co/graphql/schema.graphql