Hacker News Reader

Comment by hgaddipa001 | Hacker News Reader

We actually don't use MCP!

We just make our own tools in-house :)

Hmm the local open source model is something we've thought of, but currently haven't found open source models to be usable

View on HN

Why __don't__ you use MCP?

Find that the quality of them currently aren't there yet for a general system. They tend to be designed just to use that singular app instead of to be used in parallel with other apps.

But you are compatible with MCP, right? Otherwise users are going to miss out on the MCP ecosystem. And you are going to be spending all your time developing your own versions of MCP plugins. Wouldn't it be easier to improve the existing ones?

It's a bit more complicated. We have a full custom single agent architecture, sort of like Manus that isn't fully compatible with MCP

MCP is what you use to make tools you own compatible with agents (like Claude Code) that you don't --- or vice/versa. It's not doing anything useful in the scenario where you own both the tool calling code and the agent.

The question is whether the tools are limited to what they offer.

Are you sure they want to provide access to arbitrary random tools other people wrote? It's easy enough to add MCP support to native tool calls, but I don't know that that's a great idea given their problem domain.

that just sounds like you have no idea what MCP is, I don't even like MCPs but I can't even understand what angle you are coming from unless they specifically mean using external MCPs instead of your own, since it is you know open source...

[flagged]

It's useful for quality.

For example we can read and attach pdfs to gmail which not a lot of people can, since we have our own internal storage api.

oh so now we are flagging people that think not having MCP support is bad?

HN is out of control.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com