今日已更新 344 条资讯 | 累计 37249 条内容
关于我们

What should an MCP tool return? I ran 72 trials instead of arguing

Roshan Singh 2026年08月08日 01:41 5 次阅读 来源:Dev.to

There's an argument running about MCP right now. You've probably seen it: a 400-point thread called "MCP is dead?" with real token numbers in it, four connected servers eating 21,077 tokens of context before anyone asks a question. The argument is about what MCP costs. Almost nobody in it has measured what agents actually do with the data a tool returns. I ended up measuring that, not because I planned to, but because a maintainer refused to let me guess. The question nobody wanted to answer with opinions I contribute to CNCF Jaeger's MCP server. Last April I proposed exposing service performance metrics (latencies, call rates, error rates) as an MCP tool, and hit an immediate design fork: what shape should the output be? Option one, summary rows: pre-aggregated stats per service, compact, cheap. Option two, per-bucket time series: the raw points, roughly 720 of them per service at default resolution, expensive but complete. I asked which the maintainer preferred. The answer, verbatim, from the issue thread: This type of decision should not be based on opinion, but on benchmarks with a real agent troubleshooting some issues and using this MCP tool to access metrics, where you could do A/B testing of different output formats. Fair. So I built the A/B. The setup Everything below is public in jaeger-mcp-bench , including the harness, the tasks, the scorer, and a research log of everything that went wrong. The fixture is Jaeger v2 with the spanmetrics connector, hotrod generating traffic, and Prometheus behind it, snapshotted so every run sees identical metric state. In front of the metrics API sits a thin bench server with exactly one switch: --format=summary|series . No new semantics, just the shape of what comes back. Six troubleshooting tasks, and this part matters: three were chosen because I predicted summary would win them (point questions: current latency, ranking, threshold checks) and three because I predicted series would win (temporal questions: spike detect

本文内容来源于互联网,版权归原作者所有
查看原文