neat idea and exec. With the # of MCPs exploding, I assume there will be different MCPs offering similar services, and selecting the "right" one will require more time for the devs. I see interesting implications in the Server Manager component that will hide the complexity under the hood (for practical and security reasons). Good job.
Show HN: Mcp-use – Connect any LLM to any MCP
61–70 of 75 posts
Re: Show HN: Mcp-use – Connect any LLM to any MCP
#62> MCP-Use supports running MCP servers in a sandboxed environment using E2B's cloud infrastructure. If you want to support a local and privacy friendly sandboxed environment for code execution, you may consider something I have built, Coderunner - https://github.com/instavm/coderunner - it uses Apple's native container for hosting a jupyter server and a headless browser.
That is nice, is this like a local E2B ?
Thank you. Yes, it is. Let me know if I can help integrating it or I can send a PR.
Re: Show HN: Mcp-use – Connect any LLM to any MCP
#63For what it’s worth, several months ago, in Langroid (an agent framework that works with any LLM) we added an adaptor using FastMCP that translates between Langroid’s Tools and MCP tools, so effectively it’s a way to connect any LLM to any MCP server. Https://github.com/langroid/langroid MCP integration: https://langroid.github.io/langroid/notes/mcp-tools/
We designed this slightly differently where one can use the client directly an not only in our agent, the structure is more focused around the MCP functionality.
I'm confused -- I didn't see a single example in you readme or docs that uses the client WITHOUT your agent. Trying to understand if this is an alternative to FastMCP. I don't want your agent.
Re: Show HN: Mcp-use – Connect any LLM to any MCP
#64[stub] [explained at https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=44752814 ]
Interesting project! Today, AI projects move progress forward. Good luck to you!
Re: Show HN: Mcp-use – Connect any LLM to any MCP
#65Earlier quoted context omitted.
We designed this slightly differently where one can use the client directly an not only in our agent, the structure is more focused around the MCP functionality.
I'm confused -- I didn't see a single example in you readme or docs that uses the client WITHOUT your agent. Trying to understand if this is an alternative to FastMCP. I don't want your agent.
Hey, we have an example in our readme and docs about how to build your custom agent. but you are right, we should probably fill the client section of the documentations with examples on how to use the client API in more details. Will be done!
The extent to which this is an alternative to FastMCP depends a bit on your use case. As long as you are not interested at all in any agent, they are alternative, but if you want to create an agent we will be closer to what you need. We designed our client with the creation of an agent in mind, and will continue to do so, the design is geared towards this and we have examples of how to use this in our agent.
FastMCP client is very similar today. I see the influence of our design in their implementation. We spoke to the authors a month back and the position was that they wanted something they could use to test their own servers, so the ultimate intention was different. Not sure where it is going to go.
Re: Show HN: Mcp-use – Connect any LLM to any MCP
#66Re: Show HN: Mcp-use – Connect any LLM to any MCP
#67Introduced the tool at Porsche last week. Looks like there might be a big corporate partnership coming up
Nice! shoot us a message on Linkedin :)
Re: Show HN: Mcp-use – Connect any LLM to any MCP
#68Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'm confused -- I didn't see a single example in you readme or docs that uses the client WITHOUT your agent. Trying to understand if this is an alternative to FastMCP. I don't want your agent.
Hey, we have an example in our readme and docs about how to build your custom agent. but you are right, we should probably fill the client section of the documentations with examples on how to use the client API in more details. Will be done! The extent to which this is an alternative to FastMCP depends a bit on your use case. As long as you are not interested at all in any agent, they are alternative, but if you wan…
In my case I'm creating the agent in a custom way (using the BAML framework), so I don't need the agent part of your solution. FastMCP works ok but has some issues, so if you have a better client than can be used as a replacement, I would potentially be interested.
Re: Show HN: Mcp-use – Connect any LLM to any MCP
#69Earlier quoted context omitted.
Hey, we have an example in our readme and docs about how to build your custom agent. but you are right, we should probably fill the client section of the documentations with examples on how to use the client API in more details. Will be done! The extent to which this is an alternative to FastMCP depends a bit on your use case. As long as you are not interested at all in any agent, they are alternative, but if you wan…
In my case I'm creating the agent in a custom way (using the BAML framework), so I don't need the agent part of your solution. FastMCP works ok but has some issues, so if you have a better client than can be used as a replacement, I would potentially be interested.
I'd love to hear what you do not like about their client.
What issues does it have ?
Re: Show HN: Mcp-use – Connect any LLM to any MCP
#70The prod-readiness concerns are fair, but mcp-use fills a real gap in the MCP stack: orchestration across many servers with far less boilerplate than the official SDK. Even if the agent is as another commenter fairly pointed out, just a LangChain wrapper, the six-line setup and server manager are a nice DX upgrade.
What’s still missing is structured error semantics. Right now, when a tool explodes the LLM only sees a raw stack trace, so it can’t decide whether to retry or bail. Today, I saw another Show HN post on MCP here: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=44778968 which converts exceptions into a small JSON envelope (error, details, isRetryable, etc.) that agents can interpret. Dropping that into mcp-use’s client loop would give you observability + smarter retries for almost free.
I might be missing some important nuances here between client side and server side MCP error handling, which I’ll leave to the authors to discuss. Just thought there might be a good open source collab opportunity here.