MCP, tools and central access
- date
- category
- AI Agents
- reading
- 2 min / 315 words
The Implementer Agent does more than read code.
It also has to take actions:
read Jira issue
push branch
create PR
comment on ticket
read CI result
In a local environment the developer often wired up the tools themselves.
For example:
local agent
|
v
local MCP
|
v
GitHub PAT
|
v
GitHub
At a larger scale that means dozens of separate tokens, configurations and scopes.
What we introduce
A shared tool layer:
Approved Tools
|
┌─────────────┼─────────────┐
v v v
GitHub Jira CI/CD
\ | /
\ | /
MCP / Tool Gateway
|
agents
The agent still sees simple capabilities:
jira.get_issue()
github.create_pull_request()
ci.get_build_result()
How the agent knows which tool to use
The same way as with RAG.
Each tool has:
- a name,
- a description,
- an input schema.
Example:
github.create_pull_request
Use when implementation is complete,
required tests have passed and code should be submitted for review.
The model picks a tool based on the task and the current state of the workflow.
Authorization
MCP does not solve auth for you.
What the organization can do is build auth around the shared layer:
agent identity
|
v
policy
|
v
tool gateway / MCP
|
v
GitHub
That way the developer does not have to create their own PAT.
Where we configure it
Platform team
- GitHub App / OAuth,
- Jira integration,
- allowed repos,
- read/write,
- policy,
- audit,
- approved MCP servers.
Agent repo
Declares:
tools:
- jira.get_issue
- github.push_branch
- github.create_pull_request
Product repo
Can add further restrictions:
- do not push directly to main
- PRs always target main
- production deployment requires human approval
Tools on the market
| Solution | Cloud / type | Role |
|---|---|---|
| Microsoft Foundry tools / MCP | Azure | tools for managed agents and MCP integrations |
| Amazon Bedrock AgentCore Gateway | AWS | secure gateway to tools/MCP, auth and policies |
| Google Agent Gateway / managed MCP | GCP | controlled agent access to tools |
| your own MCP server | any | full control, but auth and maintenance are on you |
What changes organizationally
The question stops being:
How will every developer connect GitHub to their agent?
It becomes:
Which GitHub operations does the organization expose to agents, and on what terms?
That is a big shift in responsibility.