31–40 of 200 posts
The contributions for the Github project is quite intriguing: https://github.com/MiguelsPizza/WebMCP/graphs/contributors MiguelsPizza | 3 commits | 89++ | 410-- claude | 2 commits | 31,799++ | 0--
MiguelsPizza / Alex Nahas
The contributions for the Github project is quite intriguing: https://github.com/MiguelsPizza/WebMCP/graphs/contributors MiguelsPizza | 3 commits | 89++ | 410-- claude | 2 commits | 31,799++ | 0--
This puts the burden on the website owner. If I go through the trouble of creating and publishing an MCP server for my website, I assume that through some directory or method I'll be able to communicate that with consumers (browsers & other clients). It would be much more valuable for website owners if you can automate the MCP creation & maintenance.
This is an interesting take since web developers could add mcp tools into their apps rather than having browser agents having to figure out how to perform actions manually. Is the extension itself open source? Or only the extension-tools? In theory I should be able to write a chrome extension for any website to expose my own custom tools on that site right (with some reverse engineering of their APIs I assume)?
Ok it's open source now
Haven't had enough time to look through all the code there - interesting problem I guess since a single domain could have multiple accounts connected (ex: gmail w/ account 0 vs account 1 in different tabs) or just a single account (ex: HN).
This puts the burden on the website owner. If I go through the trouble of creating and publishing an MCP server for my website, I assume that through some directory or method I'll be able to communicate that with consumers (browsers & other clients). It would be much more valuable for website owners if you can automate the MCP creation & maintenance.
I think this is the practical way. The website owner (or rather the builder, since if you're running wordpress, we can assume MCP will be part of the package) is already responsible for the human interface across many devices, and also the search engine interface (robots.txt, sitemap.xml, metatags). Having a standard we can use to curate what the AI sees and how it can interact would be hugely beneficial. There's spa…
The bigger challenge I think is figuring out how to build MCPs easily for SaaS and other legacy portals. I see some push on the OpenAPI side of things which is promising but requires you to make significant changes to existing apps. Perhaps web frameworks (rails, next, laravel, etc) can agree on a standard.
wonder if it was inspired by `broadcast-mcp` [1] (hackathon project by me and a friend from may based on the same concept but not fleshed out)
This puts the burden on the website owner. If I go through the trouble of creating and publishing an MCP server for my website, I assume that through some directory or method I'll be able to communicate that with consumers (browsers & other clients). It would be much more valuable for website owners if you can automate the MCP creation & maintenance.
For react in particular, lots of the form ecosystem (react hook form) can be directly ported to MCP tools. I am currently working on a zero config react hook form integration.
But yes, MCP-B is more "work" than having the agent use the website like a user. The admission here is that it's not looking like models will be able to reliably do browser automation like humans for a while. Thus, we need to make an effort to build out better tooling for them (at least in the short term)
this is super cool wonder if it was inspired by `broadcast-mcp` [1] (hackathon project by me and a friend from may based on the same concept but not fleshed out) 1: https://x.com/RhysSullivan/status/1923956444153643443
The contributions for the Github project is quite intriguing: https://github.com/MiguelsPizza/WebMCP/graphs/contributors MiguelsPizza | 3 commits | 89++ | 410-- claude | 2 commits | 31,799++ | 0--
Claude's contributions graph is interesting. What is going on here? Does Claude Code commit as itself sometimes, but extremely rarely? I don't understand. https://github.com/claude
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Ok it's open source now
Thanks! Took a very quick look. It seems like the extension exposes tools for all domains that support mcp-b looking at DomainToolManager - does this mean if I have two tabs for a single domain you'll have duplicate tools per tab? Haven't had enough time to look through all the code there - interesting problem I guess since a single domain could have multiple accounts connected (ex: gmail w/ account 0 vs account 1 in…
Like you said there are some edge cases where two tabs of the same website expose different tool sets or have tools of the same name but would result in different outcomes when called.
Curios if you have any thoughts on how to handle this