|
|
|
|
|
by ImPostingOnHN
464 days ago
|
|
The U in UI is User, and refers to the human. If something is Interfacing with an Application, and that something is another Application instead of a human, that means the interaction is happening via an Application Interface (to make things easier, we'll call it an AI for short...just kidding). That seems to be what happens here with MCP: it is a way for an Application (the LLM) to derive programming by Interfacing with another Application (the 3rd party API provider, for example). That would make MCP an API for accessing other APIs. Not that that's bad, computers are layers of abstraction all the way down. At the same time though, we already have some of those. Perhaps some sort of OpenAPI bridge would be useful in the same manner and not require rewriting API specs, but that probably exists, too. Who am I kidding, though? The AI assistants/agents are going to be writing whatever manifests are necessary to run more AI, so it'll be a negligible increase in effort to do both. |
|
My point is, the applications have been (until recently) predominantly written by humans. API is the interface developers use through the code they write. Just like a UI can be better or worse, so can API: it might be concise, expressive, consistent – or verbose, clunky and completely unpredictable. Just like in UI you don’t want to click through dozens of submenus, in API you don’t want to make a dozen of calls to do something simple. It’s way more similar than you think!
Now where MCP fits in here is a whole other question...