The usefulness of a large language model (LLM) agent is bounded by the tools it can reach. Until recently, every connection between an AI application and an external system—a database, a code repository, a SaaS API, a file system—was a bespoke, one-off integration, producing an N×M fragmentation problem: N applications times M tools, each pair wired by hand. The Model Context Protocol (MCP), introduced by Anthropic in November 2024, proposes to replace this patchwork with a single open standard, explicitly modeled on the Language Server Protocol's success in decoupling editors from language tooling. This paper presents a systematic survey of MCP and the agent–tool ecosystem forming around it. We describe the protocol's architecture—hosts, clients, and servers communicating over JSON-RPC—and its three server primitives (tools, resources, and prompts) together with client-side features such as sampling, roots, and elicitation. We analyze its transport designs (local stdio and remote Streamable HTTP), its evolving OAuth-based authorization model, and the security questions raised by third-party tool servers, including prompt injection through tool descriptions and over-privileged tool exposure. We survey adoption across IDEs, agent frameworks, and model providers; compare MCP with adjacent approaches—native function calling, OpenAPI-described tools, and agent-to-agent protocols such as A2A; and consolidate how tool-using agents are evaluated, from function-calling leaderboards to interactive agent benchmarks. We close with open problems: server trust and registry governance, the absence of a standard MCP-specific benchmark, versioning and capability drift, and the protocol's transition to neutral stewardship under the Agentic AI Foundation.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Aref Mahmoudpour (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: