Why MCP is needed
Model Context Protocol — a single standard for "ports" to an LLM. What it solves and what it doesn't.
The problem MCP solves
Before MCP, every AI tool (Claude Code, Cursor, Codex) connected tools its own way. That means one tool would have to be implemented five times for different clients.
MCP is a single protocol that describes how a client agent talks to a tool server. The server is written once, and any compatible client can connect to it.
Who supports it
Claude Desktop / Claude Code / Cursor / Windsurf / Codex / Continue / many IDEs and agent frameworks. The standard is driven by Anthropic and the community.
What MCP gives you
- Unification: write one server — it works across multiple clients.
- Security: a standardized permissions model.
- Ecosystem: there are already hundreds of open-source MCP servers (GitHub, Filesystem, Slack, Linear, databases).
What MCP is NOT
- It doesn't replace agent logic. The logic stays in the client.
- It doesn't work with models directly — only through a client.
Open the MCP server catalog. Connect 1-2 to Claude Desktop. Try real tasks through them.
Task grader
Copy and adapt to your context. Text in angle brackets should be replaced.
Suggest MCP servers for my scenario. What I need: - Access to: <…> - Environment: <Claude Desktop / Cursor / Claude Code> - Security: <…> Give 3-5 servers with short descriptions.
Prompt sandbox
- Thinking MCP is "a new model."
- Connecting everything in sight — losing control over permissions.
- Not reading what the server actually does.
- Test servers in isolation before putting them in the shared config.
- Minimal permissions by default.
- Use a "read only" mode if it exists.
Anywhere you have a compatible AI client.
When a tool is only needed in one client and is simply written as an extension.
Quiz — 2 questions
Discussion
No comments yet. Be the first!