Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

I still prefer MCP over skills

david.coffee

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

161–170 of 415 posts

Re: I still prefer MCP over skills

#161

Post by thecupisblue »

_pdp_ wrote: post #144

Scanning through the comments here I am almost certain the majority of people in this thread run coding agents on-device. Skills that access already available resources is then more convenient and you can easily make the argument that it is more agronomic. That being said, majority of users on this planet don't use AI agents like that. They go to ChatGPT or equivalent. MCP in this case is the obvious choice because i…

I am not 100% sure I follow your train of thought.

Isn't in that case an API what they want?

An "MCP for a local app" is just an API that exposes the internal workings of the app. An "MCP for mixpanel" is just an API that exposes Mixpanel API behind Auth. There is nothing special about them for any type of user. It's just that MCP's were "made popular".

For the same type of user, I have built better and smoother solutions that included 0 MCP servers, just tools and pure API's.Define a tool standard DX and your LLM can write these tools, no need to run a server anywhere.

That is also what the author seems to be mistaken about - you don't need a CLI. A CLI is used because the DX is nice and easily permutable with all the preexisting bash tooling that is ingrained into every LLM's dataset. You don't need a .env file if you're using an API with a skill. A skill can include a script, or mentions of tools, and you are the one who controls these.

All in all, the whole "MCP vs Skill" debate online is mostly based on fundamental misunderstandings of LLM's and how they work, how harnesses work and how API's in general work, with a lot of it being fueled by people who have no relevant coding experience and are just youtube/twitter "content creators".

Some arguments against MPC's, no matter who is the user:

- MCP is just a noisy, hacky wrapper around an API or IPC (well, API behind IPC) - MCP's are too noisy for LLM's to be useful long-term, as they require a server. - You don't need an MCP, you need an easy accessible API with simple DX that the machine can use with as little context and decision making as required. - Skills are better than MCP because they basically encode the API docs/context in an LLM friendly manner. No need to run servers, just push text to system prompt.

Re: I still prefer MCP over skills

#163

Post by dvcrn »

robotobos wrote: post #2

Despite thinking this is AI-generated, I agree but everything has a caveat. Skills are good for instilling non-repeatable, yet intuitive or institutional knowledge. MCP’s are great for custom, repeatable tasks. After 5-10 runs of watching my LLM write the same exact script, I just asked it to hardcode the solution and make it a tool. The result is runs are way faster and repeatable.

> Despite thinking this is AI-generated, I agree but everything has a caveat.

Definitely not AI generated. I wrote this during a non-internet flight. :)

Re: I still prefer MCP over skills

#164

Post by noodletheworld »

prohobo wrote: post #138
antirez wrote: post #108

Don't focus on what you prefer: it does not matter. Focus on what tool the LLM requires to do its work in the best way. MCP adds friction, imagine doing yourself the work using the average MCP server. However, skills alone are not sufficient if you want, for instance, creating the ability for LLMs to instrument a complicated system. Work in two steps: 1. Ask the LLM to build a tool, under your guide and specification…

I feel like the MCP conversation conflates too many things and everyone has strong assumptions that aren't always correct. The fundamental issue is between one-off vs. persistent access across sessions: - If you need to interact with a local app in a one-off session, then use CLI. - If you need to interact with an online service in a one-off session, then use their API. - If you need to interact with a local app in a…

> MCP is the absolute best and most effective way to integrate external tools into your agent sessions

Nope.

The best way to interact with an external service is an api.

It was the best way before, and its the best way now.

MCP doesn't scale and it has a bloated unnecessarily complicated spec.

Some MCP servers are good; but in general a new bad way of interacting with external services, is not the best way of doing it, and the assertion that it is in general, best, is what I refer to as “works for me” coolaid.

…because it probably does work well for you.

…because you are using a few, good, MCP servers.

However, that doesn't scale, for all the reasons listed by the many detractors of MCP.

Its not that it cant be used effectively, it is that in general it is a solution that has been incompetently slapped on by many providers who dont appreciate how to do it well and even then, it scales badly.

It is a bad solution for a solved problem.

Agents have made the problem MCP was solving obsolete.

Re: I still prefer MCP over skills

#165

Post by _pdp_ »

thecupisblue wrote: post #161
_pdp_ wrote: post #144

Scanning through the comments here I am almost certain the majority of people in this thread run coding agents on-device. Skills that access already available resources is then more convenient and you can easily make the argument that it is more agronomic. That being said, majority of users on this planet don't use AI agents like that. They go to ChatGPT or equivalent. MCP in this case is the obvious choice because i…

I am not 100% sure I follow your train of thought. Isn't in that case an API what they want? An "MCP for a local app" is just an API that exposes the internal workings of the app. An "MCP for mixpanel" is just an API that exposes Mixpanel API behind Auth. There is nothing special about them for any type of user. It's just that MCP's were "made popular". For the same type of user, I have built better and smoother solu…

You are mostly right except forgetting that not all SaaS companies want their users to shoot themselves in the foot by exposing the entire API surface and all of its quirks and risks to AI agents.

Furthermore, In many cases some APIs, for better or worse, are not even sufficient. For example, the Notion MCP has full text search capabilities. Their API allows searching by title only. I don't know why but I am sure there are reasons.

MCP looks redundant until you start working with real users that don't know a thing about AI agents, programming and security.

Re: I still prefer MCP over skills

#167

Post by vasco »

_pdp_ wrote: post #144

Scanning through the comments here I am almost certain the majority of people in this thread run coding agents on-device. Skills that access already available resources is then more convenient and you can easily make the argument that it is more agronomic. That being said, majority of users on this planet don't use AI agents like that. They go to ChatGPT or equivalent. MCP in this case is the obvious choice because i…

More agronomic means shittier, eh? I guess you meant ergonomic but funny typo
Post reply on HN