[whoknowsidont]

>No, they don't. LLM frontends, which are traditional deterministic programs, use MCP to do that, and to find schemas for what should be sent to and expected from the tools.

You are REALLY, REALLY misunderstanding how this works. Like severely.

You think MCP is being used for some other purpose despite the one it was explicitly designed for... which is just weird and silly.

>Confusing these two issues can only happen if you think the model does something with each response that controls whether or not the toolchain validates it

No, you're still just arguing against something no one is arguing for the sake of pretending like MCP is doing something it literally cannot do or fundamentally fix about how LLM's operate.

I promise you if you read this a month from now with a fresh pair of eyes you will see your mistake.

[Huggernaut]

What do you think the `tools/call` MCP flow is between the LLM and an MCP server? For example, if I had the GitHub MCP server configured on Claude Code and prompted "Show me the most recent pull requests on the torvalds/linux repository".

[didibus]

Hum, I'm not sure if everyone is simply unable to understand what you are saying, including me, but if the MCP client validates the MCP server response against the schema before passing the response to the LLM model, the model doesn't even matter, your MCP client could choose to report an error and interrupt the agentic flow.

That will depend on what MCP client you are using and how they've handled it.