← Back to context

Comment by zvoque

19 hours ago

I've thought that skills and small scripts > MCP for quite a while now, tried out MCP in the early days (official ones, ones i made for scripts i already had), but they always end up using more tool calls/tokens than if i had just written a script + skill for claude.

MCP seems like what you'd do when you want to encapsulate and share a skill+script in a standard way.

  • personally if i have the need to move a skill/script, etc. to another one of my machines, i'll make a git repo for them (if they aren't already on git)

    • This was one of the first ideas me and my team had for sharing skills and scripts. The problem is this is a very "why Dropbox and not FTP" answer.

      The second you utter the word git, you may have lost 90% of your audience - depending on their background, of course. MCPs are a lot more non-tech friendly

      2 replies →

  • You can share a skill by copy pasting the text file to someone in slack.

    Its not that hard.

    • You can’t sell that in b2b negotiations though. You can absolutely say “and for $x per user we will grant you access to our central, closed-source MCP server that does things our CLI doesn’t do”.

    • right, but if you have 300 employees using ai and you want to share a skill with all of them, and you want to be able to push an update to the skill, mcp provides you with a standard way to do that.

      i dont understand why people are so invested in making this a winner-take-all battle. skills are ligthweight and ad-hoc, MCP is managed and centralized. there's a place for both of those things, even if your personal workflow only needs skills.

      3 replies →