WeWorkBuddy

MCP vs CLI for AI Agents: A Comparative Analysis of Tool Integration Strategies for Autonomous Systems

arXiv:2610.30157v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: AI agents require interfaces to interact with external systems such as files, APIs, databases, and cloud services. Two competing paradigms have emerged: CLI (Command Line Interface), where agents execute shell commands directly, and MCP (Model Context Protocol), a structured JSON-RPC protocol providing governed, typed tool access. This paper presents a comparative analysis across 14 evaluation dimensions, supported by worked examples, security asse

Read original source
Source reference for MCP vs CLI for AI Agents: A Comparative Analysis of Tool Integration Strategies for Autonomous Systems. Screenshot not yet available.
Source record · preview pending · arxiv.orgOpen the source for the full page.

Source record

Research analysis

Research claim

Paper identifier: 2610.30157. Source account: arXiv:2610.30157v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: AI agents require interfaces to interact with external systems such as files, APIs, databases, and cloud services. Two competing paradigms have emerged: CLI (Command Line Interface), where agents execute shell commands directly, and MCP (Model Context Protocol), a structured JSON-RPC protocol providing governed, typed tool access. This paper presents a comparative analysis across 14 evaluation dimensions, supported by worked examples, security asse

Evaluation record

Recent records to compare: “Paper: Nubank cuts AI agent update cycles from 3 weeks to under 5 days” (Hacker News, Nov 6, 2026); “Cognitive Bias Signatures in Search-Equipped LLM Agents: A Stage-Resolved Analysis” (arXiv, Nov 5, 2026). Shared themes are navigation hints; they have not been verified as the same need or independent corroboration.

What the result supports

Interpret results only for the reported model version, task, data and inference budget. Community votes, downloads or a benchmark position do not establish reliability in a different workflow.

Validity gaps

Check sample selection, baseline configuration, uncertainty, contamination risk, negative results and access to code or weights. No reproduction by WeWorkBuddy is recorded here.

Verification plan

Read the paper or model card and its evaluation appendix. Reproduce one bounded result against the stated baseline, then test a representative user task and record where the conclusion fails.