Feed aggregator

Article URL: https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/crrpggegwe0o

Comments URL: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48407411

Points: 1

# Comments: 0

Article URL: https://adamsilver.io/blog/form-design-from-zero-to-hero-all-in-one-blog-post/

Comments URL: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48407403

Points: 1

# Comments: 0

Article URL: https://www.businessinsider.com/teradata-pauses-raises-employee-compensation-ai-budget-2026-6

Comments URL: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48407401

Points: 2

# Comments: 0

I recently did some tests on two MCPs with identical functionalities. Turns out one of them has really bad performance. So I wanna share those bad MCP design patterns that cause this.

It all started when I wrote an MCP Server (MCP-A) for a to-do list app. Later, the app officially released its own MCP Server (MCP-B). Both MCPs have the same functionalities and hit the same backend API.

The experiment is set up as follows:

- Both MCP Servers connect to the same ToDo list account, and it will be reset after each test. - 40 test prompts to simulate typical use cases for these MCPs. - The test was conducted with the same model, system prompt, and Agent framework

Here are the results:

| Metric | MCP-A | MCP-B | Gap | | ------------------- | ----------- | ----------- | ----- | | Tool Desc Length | 11,464 | 3,682 | — | | Pass Rate | 36/40 (90%) | 36/40 (90%) | Same | | Total input tokens | 637,244 | 3,174,329 | 4.98× | | Total output tokens | 17,301 | 23,238 | 1.34× | | Total Agent steps | 122 | 157 | 1.29× | | Total time | 597s | 676s | 1.13× |

---

The result shows that MCP-B took 35 more ReAct loops to complete 40 test cases compared to MCP-A, which means 30% more output tokens. I examined the log and found that the root cause is poor query tool design.

Take the `search tool` for example, its job is to find a todo item in the ToDo list. In MCP-B, this tool returns this:

{ "id": "6a1916b48f08cb3a4c857ed0", "title": "buy some groceries", "url": "https://todo.example.com/tasks/6a1916b48f08cb3a4c857ed0" }

But other CRUD operations require `project_id`, and `search_tool` doesn't return it. So the Agent has to call another tool `get_task_by_id`. On the other hand, MCP-A's query_tasks returns all necessary info to perform the next action in a single call:

Task 1: ID: 6a19143e8f084a8c8101612f Title: buy some groceries Project ID: 6a1914378f084a8c810160a9 Start Date: 2025-07-19 10:00:00 Priority: Medium Status: Active Unfiltered API Data was dumped into context window

If MCP returns pure API results to the Agent's context unprocessed, the Agent's context window will accumulate very fast.

Take MCP-B's `create_task` tool, for example. Its job is to create a to-do item. This is what this tool returns:

{ "id": "6a180de78f086bdead0608be", "projectId": "inbox125587327", ..... "createdTime": "2026-05-28T09:41:59+0000", "modifiedTime": "2026-05-28T09:41:59+0000", "focusSummaries": null }

These 600+ characters mean nothing to the Agent's task, but are still dumped into the Agent's context. On the other hand, MCP-A's create_tasks does a layer of filtering and formatting. This little tweak makes a huge difference in input token usage.

Another issue is tool count. More tools mean a larger candidate set for the model to choose from, which directly increases decision difficulty. In MCP-A, 47 tools were compressed down to 14, covering the same functionality with fewer tools.

---

So here are my takeaways on good MCP tool design: - When designing a tool, think about what the Agent will need next, not just what it's asking for right now. Return enough context in the result so the Agent can take the next action without making another round-trip.

- Too many tools will increase the model's decision burden. So it'd be better to minimize the number of tools within an MCP. Make sure they don't overlap functionalities.

- When your MCP returns data to the LLM, try to keep it LLM-friendly, which means readable. You can filter out unnecessary fields from the API response and format the data, rather than passing through raw JSON.

---

All the tests above were run by MCP-Eval. It's an MCP Server benchmarking tool. If you want to check your MCP's performance, feel free to check this out.

https://github.com/Code-MonkeyZhang/mcp-eval

Comments URL: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48407391

Points: 2

# Comments: 0

Article URL: https://www.louvre.fr/en/explore/life-at-the-museum/delacroix-s-entry-of-the-crusaders-into-constantinople-restored-to-its-original-glory

Comments URL: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48407368

Points: 1

# Comments: 0

Article URL: https://fedoramagazine.org/fedora-43-upgrade-revealed-20-years-old-outlook-security-bug/

Comments URL: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48407356

Points: 2

# Comments: 0

Article URL: https://www.bloomberg.com/features/2026-dallas-h1b-housing-market/

Comments URL: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48407355

Points: 3

# Comments: 0

Article URL: https://arxiv.org/abs/2606.06021

Comments URL: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48407343

Points: 1

# Comments: 0

Article URL: https://bricksandminifigs.com/blog/blog/2026/06/04/bricks-and-minifigs-salem-store-timeline/

Comments URL: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48407337

Points: 2

# Comments: 0

Article URL: https://twitter.com/ido_pesok/status/2060416230641881336

Comments URL: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48407332

Points: 1

# Comments: 0

Article URL: https://www.ooooo.law/board/8?lang=en

Comments URL: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48407316

Points: 1

# Comments: 0

Is replacing SaaS with vibe coding a thing? Are there measurable gains? How much work is it to support/maintain these?

Comments URL: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48407312

Points: 2

# Comments: 0

Article URL: https://www.nytimes.com/2026/06/04/style/chatgpt-advertising-campaign-artificial-intelligence.html

Comments URL: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48407290

Points: 1

# Comments: 0

Article URL: https://store.steampowered.com/app/2802710/Quantum_Odyssey/

Comments URL: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48407288

Points: 1

# Comments: 0

Article URL: https://www.wsj.com/finance/banking/jpmorgan-citi-and-big-banks-plan-new-tokenized-deposit-system-to-answer-crypto-6b2d696b

Comments URL: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48407283

Points: 1

# Comments: 0

Article URL: https://www.theregister.com/security/2026/06/04/openais-codex-chains-decade-old-dos-techniques-into-http/2-bomb/5251377

Comments URL: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48407277

Points: 1

# Comments: 0

Article URL: https://www.cnbc.com/2026/06/04/bitcoin-is-weathering-its-ugliest-week-in-months-as-narrative-fades-and-liquidity-rotates.html

Comments URL: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48407274

Points: 4

# Comments: 2

A vulnerability in the CLI of Cisco Catalyst SD-WAN Manager, formerly SD-WAN vManage, could allow an authenticated, local attacker to execute arbitrary commands as root by supplying a crafted file to the affected system.

This vulnerability is due to insufficient validation of user-supplied input. An attacker could exploit this vulnerability by uploading a crafted file to the affected system. A successful exploit could allow the attacker to perform command injection attacks on an affected system and elevate their privileges as the root user. 

To exploit this vulnerability, the attacker must have netadmin privileges on the affected system. This would require valid credentials or exploitation of CVE-2026-20182 or CVE-2026-20127. Cisco is not aware of successful exploitation by other methods. Cisco has observed limited cases where the exploitation of this bug resulted in a configuration change pushed to edge devices.

Cisco recommends that customers upgrade to the fixed software that is documented in the Catalyst SD-WAN Security Advisory that was published on May 14, 2026, and verify the configuration of the edge devices.

Cisco has not released software updates that address this vulnerability. There are no workarounds that address this vulnerability.

Important: To preserve possible indicators of compromise, customers should issue the request admin-tech command from each of the control components in the SD-WAN deployment before upgrading. After the admin-tech file has been collected, software should be upgraded at the earliest opportunity.

Before upgrading an SD-WAN deployment to a fixed release, retain relevant logs. After upgrading, verify that the system has not been compromised by checking the logs for the indicators of compromise as documented in this advisory. If the logs show indicators of compromise and the system is confirmed to be compromised, applying the software update alone will not resolve the vulnerability. In such cases, follow the specific remediation steps that will be provided by the Cisco Technical Assistance Center (TAC) to help secure the system. This section will be updated as information becomes available.

This advisory is available at the following link:
https://sec.cloudapps.cisco.com/security/center/content/CiscoSecurityAdvisory/cisco-sa-sdwan-privesc-4uxFrdzx

<br/>Security Impact Rating: High <br/>CVE: CVE-2026-20245

Article URL: https://www.konichivalue.com/p/what-happens-if-japan-takes-in-zero

Comments URL: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48407068

Points: 1

# Comments: 0

Article URL: https://lwn.net/Articles/1073761/

Comments URL: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48407061

Points: 1

# Comments: 0