But you are compatible with MCP, right? Otherwise users are going to miss out on the MCP ecosystem. And you are going to be spending all your time developing your own versions of MCP plugins. Wouldn't it be easier to improve the existing ones?
But you are compatible with MCP, right? Otherwise users are going to miss out on the MCP ecosystem. And you are going to be spending all your time developing your own versions of MCP plugins. Wouldn't it be easier to improve the existing ones?
It's a bit more complicated. We have a full custom single agent architecture, sort of like Manus that isn't fully compatible with MCP
MCP is what you use to make tools you own compatible with agents (like Claude Code) that you don't --- or vice/versa. It's not doing anything useful in the scenario where you own both the tool calling code and the agent.
The question is whether the tools are limited to what they offer.
Are you sure they want to provide access to arbitrary random tools other people wrote? It's easy enough to add MCP support to native tool calls, but I don't know that that's a great idea given their problem domain.