I took time to read everything on Twitter/Reddit/Documentation about this. I think I have a complete picture. Here is a quickstart for anyone who is just getting into it. https://glama.ai/blog/2024-11-25-model-context-protocol-quic...
[deleted]
Model Context Protocol
201–210 of 283 posts
Re: Model Context Protocol
#202@jspahrsummers and I have been working on this for the last few months at Anthropic. I am happy to answer any questions people might have.
For Rust, could one leverage the type + docs system to create such a server? I didn't delve into the details but one of the issues of Claude is that it has no knowledge of the methods that are available to it (vs LSP). Will creating such a server make it able to do informed suggestions?
Re: Model Context Protocol
#203Is this similar to what Sourcegraph's OpenCtx tries to do? Has OpenCtx ever gained much traction?
Yeah, we’re using it a lot at Sourcegraph. There are some extra APIs it offers beyond what MCP offers, such as annotations (as you can see on the homepage of https://openctx.org ). We worked with Anthropic on MCP because this kind of layer benefits everyone, and we’ve already shipped interoperability.
Interesting. In Cody training sessions given by Sourcegraph, I saw OpenCtx mentioned a few times "casually", and the focus is always on Cody core concepts and features like prompt engineering and manual context etc. Sounds like for enterprise customers, setting up context is meant for infrastructure teams within the company, and end users mostly should not worry about OpenCxt?
Re: Model Context Protocol
#204Something is telling me this _might_ turn out to be a huge deal; I can't quite put a finger on what is that makes me feel that, but opening private data and tools via an open protocol to AI apps just feels like a game changer.
One of the biggest issues of LLM is that they have a lossy memory. Say there is a function from_json that accepts 4 arguments. An LLM might predict that it accepts 3 arguments and thus produce non-functional code. However, if you add the docs for the function, the LLM will write correct code.
With the LLM being able to tap up to date context (like LSP), you won't need that back-and-forth dance. This will massively improve code generations.
Re: Model Context Protocol
#205Earlier quoted context omitted.
[flagged]
I don't even know what to respond/what this is asking.
I think they meant that your unprompted declaration of having understood the feature, followed by giving no apparent insight into it is odd and something reminiscent of a bot.
Your entire comment could just be “Here’s the quickstart guide: ” and literally no useful information would be lost.
A human would topically say: “I spent some time understanding the feature and I think I got it.
Here the quickstart: ”
Or perhaps you wrote the quickstart? That’s not clear from your wording.
Re: Model Context Protocol
#206@jspahrsummers and I have been working on this for the last few months at Anthropic. I am happy to answer any questions people might have.
Why not use GraphQL instead of inventing a whole new protocol?
Re: Model Context Protocol
#207@jspahrsummers and I have been working on this for the last few months at Anthropic. I am happy to answer any questions people might have.
I'd love to develop some MCP servers, but I just learned that Claude Desktop doesn't support Linux. Are there any good general-purpose MCP clients that I can test against? Do I have to write my own?
(Closest I can find is zed/cody but those aren't really general purpose)
Re: Model Context Protocol
#208Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yeah, we’re using it a lot at Sourcegraph. There are some extra APIs it offers beyond what MCP offers, such as annotations (as you can see on the homepage of https://openctx.org ). We worked with Anthropic on MCP because this kind of layer benefits everyone, and we’ve already shipped interoperability.
Interesting. In Cody training sessions given by Sourcegraph, I saw OpenCtx mentioned a few times "casually", and the focus is always on Cody core concepts and features like prompt engineering and manual context etc. Sounds like for enterprise customers, setting up context is meant for infrastructure teams within the company, and end users mostly should not worry about OpenCxt?
Most users won't and shouldn't need to go through the process of adding context sources. In the enterprise, you want these to be chosen by (and pre-authed/configured by) admins, or at least not by each individual user, because that would introduce a lot of friction and inconsistency. We are still working on making that smooth, which is why we haven't been very loud about OpenCtx to end users yet.
But today we already have lots of enterprise customers building their own OpenCtx providers and/or using the `openctx.providers` global settings in Sourcegraph to configure them in the current state. OpenCtx has been quite valuable already here to our customers.
Re: Model Context Protocol
#209I eventually return from every brabra protocol/framework to SQL, txt, standard library, due to inefficiency of introducing meaningless layer. People or me while a go often avoid confronting difficult problems which actually matters. Rather worse, frameworks, buzz technology words are the world of incompetitive people.
Re: Model Context Protocol
#210Earlier quoted context omitted.
I don't even know what to respond/what this is asking.
I think they meant that your unprompted declaration of having understood the feature, followed by giving no apparent insight into it is odd and something reminiscent of a bot. Your entire comment could just be “Here’s the quickstart guide: ” and literally no useful information would be lost. A human would topically say: “I spent some time understanding the feature and I think I got it. Here the quickstart: ” Or perha…
This makes me think about the email from Greg and Ilya to Sam
https://www.reddit.com/r/OpenAI/comments/1gsnxmy/more_lawsui...
I guess I spend my entire day working with LLM prompts, CoT, etc. so maybe I am without realizing starting to adopt some of the same language patterns. The comment reads normal to me, but I bet so did 'We don’t understand your cost function' for Greg and Ilya.