In such a context also a coding agent has it much easier. But establishing that or adding something beyond what's already safely established, here high intelligence models really pay off

You'd need some scoring where precise hits get better score than those only found by fuzzy search. With that it's maybe acceptable, but I personally preferred just being able to switch it easily/quickly when needed and by preference.

In a private bookmark extension project, I explictly supported both and made it easy to switch them any time: https://github.com/Fannon/search-bookmarks-history-and-tabs

Comments URL: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49133023

Points: 7

# Comments: 1

The Captain Pikant videos are really well done aestetically

This would be cheaper, much more versatile and customizable I bet. Many MIDI / DAW controllers can be "programmed" via MIDI IN/OUT, e.g. how to light the pads.

What the people that predicted that AI will change productivity drastically in just a year or two imho underestimate: Just because a technology is capable of this in theory (and I think it is, even today) - it doesn't mean we are willing or able to deploy it to its full potential at scale. There will be a few individuals and very few companies which will do so or come close.

For most of the companies, they're still doing a lot of processes manually that could have been automated with 80s technology. Why should a change in the technology suddenly make everyone change their mindset, culture, way of thinking? This may take 1-2 generations to more fully form. Maybe that's also better: Slower change is less destablizing for society / individuals, I think of it more like a defensive mechanism of the system to keep it stable.

I hope such things will be standardized across vendors. Now that they founded the Agentic AI Foundation (AAIF) and also contributed AGENTS.md, I would hope that skills become a logical extension of that.

https://www.linuxfoundation.org/press/linux-foundation-annou...

https://aaif.io/

Comments URL: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=45493236

Points: 5

# Comments: 0

But now that many companies focus on MCP as a remote API, the question obviously comes up why not just use standard API protocols for that and just optimize the metadata for AI consumption.

The article also mentioned that OpenAPI is too verbose: I totally see that, but you could optimize this by stripping an OpenAPI file down to the basics that you need for LLM use, maybe even using the Overlay spec. Or you convert your OpenAPI files to the https://www.utcp.io format that pylotlight mentioned.

Some "curation" of what's really relevant for AI consumption may be a helpful anyway, as too many tools will also lead to problems in picking the right ones.

I did something similar a long time back, but not really focused on something that tiles up: https://svg-generator.netlify.app/

Still, I think it should only be an option, not a necessity to create an MCP API around existing APIs. Sure, you can do REST APIs really badly and OpenAPI has a lot of issues in describing the API (for example, you can't even express the concept of references / relations within and across APIs!).

REST APIs also don't have to be generic CRUD, you could also follow the DDD idea of having actions and services, that are their own operation, potentially grouping calls together and having a clear "business semantics" that can be better understood by machines (and humans!).

My feeling is that MCP also tries to fix a few things, we should consider fixing with APIs in general - so at least good APIs can be used by LLMs without any indirections.

Using a smaller set of different concepts also helps reducing the cognitive load, even if it leads to more verbosity ("less clever code").

https://www.sicpers.info/2018/03/why-inheritance-never-made-...