一位开发者有关 MCP 的观点

待字闺中 · 公众号 · 程序员 · 2025-03-28 20:02

正文

请到「今天看啥」查看全文

Zero Re-use of Existing API Surfaces 未重用现有API接口

If I want an LLM to use an existing service, why don't I have the LLM just consume the API directly? Why do I need to create a new server that wraps the existing API? We have had REST and Swagger for a long time now, and it would be a lot easier to just take a Swagger spec and generate a simplified JSON schema from it that aligned with the usual tool definitions. Maybe FastOpenAPI would be a good fit for this, at least for some modern APIs.

如果我想让LLM使用现有服务，为什么不让LLM直接消费API呢？为什么我需要创建一个新的服务器来包装现有的API？我们已经有了REST和Swagger很长时间了，直接从Swagger规范生成一个与常用工具定义对齐的简化JSON模式会容易得多。也许FastOpenAPI适合这个用途，至少对于一些现代API来说是这样。

I also don't see a lot of emphasis on security, access control, or anything that would make me feel comfortable exposing an MCP server to an LLM. I get that this is a work in progress, but it feels like a lot of effort is being wasted on creating a new server for every API instead of just using the existing ones.

我也看不到很多对安全、访问控制或任何让我感到安心地将MCP服务器暴露于LLM的重视。我明白这还是一个正在进行中的项目，但感觉很多努力都浪费在了为每个API创建新的服务器上，而不是直接使用现有的服务器。