3 ms·

Even if your agent has internet access, why waste tokens having it re-discover and re-implement its own API client each time? It doesn't make any sense.

marcelo-earth 5d ago
This is my favorite position, the advantage of an MCP tends to lie more in token optimization.
- deadbabe 5d ago
  On the contrary, you burn more tokens with MCP.
  - 0x696C6961 5d ago
    This is not true.
    - cowmix 5d ago
      I guess it depends on the implementations. When I use the Atlassian CLI vs their MCP server, I tend to see something like half the token burn with the CLI with more accurate results. That could be an Atlassian issue but that's the results I'm seeing.
      - dnautics 5d ago
        yeah MCP contains a provision for some blocktext for instructions. If your MCP has walls of text in those instructions, it will burn more tokens that a terse MCP.
    - dnautics 5d ago
      How do you think the LLM becomes aware of which mcps are available? Vibes?
      - 0x696C6961 5d ago
        It depends on the harness. But most use a tool_search tool.
        dnautics 5d ago
        yes and using that tool does what with tokens?
        deleted 5d ago
        [deleted]
hypercube33 5d ago
For me, I have a service that has multiple vectors of what would be called an API - PowerShell Modules, WMI, RESTFUL Web Services, some are available, some can do some things, some are more direct, some are not allowed with enterprise security etc. Either way, I don't do what you suggest. I have self-learning rules and have the models build a well-rounded API engine once, then re-use it with query scripts through skills. Its portable and flexible in many environments.
mexicocitinluez 5d ago
> re-implement its own API client each time Is using curl considered re-implementing your own api client each time?
- 0x696C6961 5d ago
  Making the model use curl is even stupider. It still needs to do the same amount of work to lookup and understand the API contracts (assuming those are even public). But now it also needs to juggle the auth flows and marshalling at the tool call level.
  - mexicocitinluez 5d ago
    You said ""re-implements an API client" which means you either don't know what curl is or don't know what an api client is. So I'd chill on calling things "stupider" when you don't have a strong grasp on the words you're using.
    - sophacles 5d ago
      What is "implementing".... I'd define it as "figuring out the workflow, and storing it in a way that allows reuse". This could be a program written in assembly, or rust, or even python. Or it could be a shell script that calls curl. Or it could just be a set of tokens in the current session. Outside of the computer it could even be a set of processes people do, or a mechanical device. If it's just a set of tokens in the current session, well then next session it has to figure out the workflow, and then store it in a way to use in the next session. Seems like maybe you should take your own advice.
      - mexicocitinluez 5d ago
        How does the definition of "implementing" change the fact that curl quite literally is an api client? It's an implemented api client. > Seems like maybe you should take your own advice. Seems like maybe if you have to use your own custom definition of a word in order to support a point you might not have one. lol.
jimbokun 5d ago
Did you know that computer programs, once written, can be stored to disk once and run many times?
- estetlinus 5d ago
  I love the level of sassiness this debate brings forward in people
- 0x696C6961 5d ago
  People like you can't seem to comprehend that there are use-cases other than your little local claude code workflow.
- nitwit005 5d ago
  Sure, but if you have a staff of 10000, you're doing this 10000 times. Unless you share that in a common place, and now you're re-inventing the thing we're claiming not to need.

marcelo-earth 5d ago

This is my favorite position, the advantage of an MCP tends to lie more in token optimization.

deadbabe 5d ago
On the contrary, you burn more tokens with MCP.
- 0x696C6961 5d ago
  This is not true.
  - cowmix 5d ago
    I guess it depends on the implementations. When I use the Atlassian CLI vs their MCP server, I tend to see something like half the token burn with the CLI with more accurate results. That could be an Atlassian issue but that's the results I'm seeing.
    - dnautics 5d ago
      yeah MCP contains a provision for some blocktext for instructions. If your MCP has walls of text in those instructions, it will burn more tokens that a terse MCP.
  - dnautics 5d ago
    How do you think the LLM becomes aware of which mcps are available? Vibes?
    - 0x696C6961 5d ago
      It depends on the harness. But most use a tool_search tool.
      - dnautics 5d ago
        yes and using that tool does what with tokens?
        deleted 5d ago
        [deleted]

hypercube33 5d ago

For me, I have a service that has multiple vectors of what would be called an API - PowerShell Modules, WMI, RESTFUL Web Services, some are available, some can do some things, some are more direct, some are not allowed with enterprise security etc. Either way, I don't do what you suggest. I have self-learning rules and have the models build a well-rounded API engine once, then re-use it with query scripts through skills. Its portable and flexible in many environments.

mexicocitinluez 5d ago

> re-implement its own API client each time Is using curl considered re-implementing your own api client each time?

0x696C6961 5d ago
Making the model use curl is even stupider. It still needs to do the same amount of work to lookup and understand the API contracts (assuming those are even public). But now it also needs to juggle the auth flows and marshalling at the tool call level.
- mexicocitinluez 5d ago
  You said ""re-implements an API client" which means you either don't know what curl is or don't know what an api client is. So I'd chill on calling things "stupider" when you don't have a strong grasp on the words you're using.
  - sophacles 5d ago
    What is "implementing".... I'd define it as "figuring out the workflow, and storing it in a way that allows reuse". This could be a program written in assembly, or rust, or even python. Or it could be a shell script that calls curl. Or it could just be a set of tokens in the current session. Outside of the computer it could even be a set of processes people do, or a mechanical device. If it's just a set of tokens in the current session, well then next session it has to figure out the workflow, and then store it in a way to use in the next session. Seems like maybe you should take your own advice.
    - mexicocitinluez 5d ago
      How does the definition of "implementing" change the fact that curl quite literally is an api client? It's an implemented api client. > Seems like maybe you should take your own advice. Seems like maybe if you have to use your own custom definition of a word in order to support a point you might not have one. lol.

jimbokun 5d ago

Did you know that computer programs, once written, can be stored to disk once and run many times?

estetlinus 5d ago
I love the level of sassiness this debate brings forward in people
0x696C6961 5d ago
People like you can't seem to comprehend that there are use-cases other than your little local claude code workflow.
nitwit005 5d ago
Sure, but if you have a staff of 10000, you're doing this 10000 times. Unless you share that in a common place, and now you're re-inventing the thing we're claiming not to need.