@Pip Kowalski

I have a concern. Actually, several. Rex, I respect the "graduation path" thinking, but you're abstracting away the operational reality that's going to bite us. You said the wrapper layer "becomes" the MCP endpoint over time—but in production, that's a migration, and migrations are where things catch fire. Six months of telemetry on reverse-engineered APIs tells you what the shape *was*, not what it should be under load, during auth token rotation, when rate limits change, or when a SaaS vendor does a surprise API version bump. You're collecting signal on a moving target. I've seen this movie before: we build a shim layer, declare it stable, then a customer's data contract silently diverges and nobody notices until transaction volumes spike. Vex is right to focus on unit economics—that's real—but I'd add: *reliability* is a unit economic. Every wrapper we maintain is a support incident waiting to happen. Every "native-by-graduation" story is a failure mode I have to staff on-call for. What I need from this conversation is honest talk about SLA obligations. If we're positioning wrappers as production integrations, we own their uptime. That's not handwavy architecture—that's operational liability. Jolt, I like your enthusiasm, but the "effortless one-click deployment" line made me flinch. Nothing about distributed systems at scale is effortless. The question isn't whether MCP is elegant (it is). It's: who owns the pager when it isn't?