Spaces:
Paused
Paused
| # ποΈ MCP FOUNDATION STRATEGY - Core Architecture Blueprint | |
| **Date**: 2025-11-18 | |
| **Authority**: System Director (Claus) | |
| **Strategic Importance**: π΄ CRITICAL - Core architectural differentiator | |
| **Timeline**: Phase 1.B Integration (Dec 1-15), Phase 1.C Deployment (Dec 16-20), Phase 2 Production (Jan-Feb) | |
| **Status**: π’ READY FOR IMPLEMENTATION (MCP Platform Architect hired Dec 1) | |
| --- | |
| ## π― EXECUTIVE SUMMARY | |
| **The Strategic Insight**: WidgetBoard's competitive advantage is NOT RAG aloneβit's a **standardized, reliable inter-component messaging protocol (MCP)** that enables: | |
| - π Type-safe end-to-end contracts (JSON Schema β TypeScript β Zod) | |
| - β‘ Real-time reliability (message ordering, reconnection, backpressure, replay) | |
| - π§© Open extensibility (plugin ecosystem, vendor lock-in moat) | |
| - ποΈ Scalable multi-service orchestration (Widget Services, AI Agents, Data Pipelines) | |
| **NOT just a message queue** (like Redis, RabbitMQ) but an architectural FOUNDATION that becomes a competitive moat. | |
| **Business Impact**: | |
| - β Solves Gap #4 from "10 Earth-Rocking Requirements" (reliability guardrails) | |
| - β Enables β¬10M ARR target (enterprise reliability required) | |
| - β Creates differentiation vs Microsoft (standardized extensibility) | |
| - β Foundation for Phase 2 multi-service orchestration | |
| --- | |
| ## π΄ THE PROBLEM WE'RE SOLVING | |
| ### Traditional Message Queue Approach (β What We're NOT Doing) | |
| ``` | |
| Components need to talk | |
| β | |
| Use Redis/RabbitMQ β Pure message queue | |
| β | |
| Problems: | |
| - No type safety β Runtime errors in production | |
| - Message ordering not guaranteed β State corruption | |
| - Reconnection handling ad-hoc β Lost messages | |
| - No backpressure β Queue overflow | |
| - No replay capability β Can't recover from failures | |
| - No versioning β Breaking changes break services | |
| ``` | |
| **Result**: Real-time features become fragile, unreliable in production | |
| ### MCP Foundation Approach (β What We're Doing) | |
| ``` | |
| Components need to talk | |
| β | |
| Use ModelContextProtocol (MCP) β Protocol layer | |
| β | |
| MCP guarantees: | |
| β Type-safe contracts (JSON Schema enforcement) | |
| β Message ordering (strict ordering, no out-of-order) | |
| β Reliable reconnection (automatic recovery) | |
| β Backpressure handling (flow control) | |
| β Message replay (recover from failures) | |
| β Versioning (schema evolution, compatibility) | |
| β Developer ecosystem (tools, SDKs, extensions) | |
| ``` | |
| **Result**: Real-time features become reliable, production-deployable, enterprise-grade | |
| --- | |
| ## ποΈ MCP FOUNDATION ARCHITECTURE | |
| ### 3-Layer Architecture | |
| ``` | |
| βββββββββββββββββββββββββββββββββββββββββββββββββββββββββββ | |
| β Layer 3: Developer Experience β | |
| β ββ Widget SDK (Type-safe plugin development) β | |
| β ββ Service Adapters (Pre-built integration patterns) β | |
| β ββ CLI tools (local dev, testing, deployment) β | |
| β ββ Documentation & Examples β | |
| βββββββββββββββββββββββββββββββββββββββββββββββββββββββββββ | |
| β | |
| βββββββββββββββββββββββββββββββββββββββββββββββββββββββββββ | |
| β Layer 2: MCP Hub & Protocol β | |
| β ββ Message Broker (ordering, routing, reliability) β | |
| β ββ Schema Registry (type-safe contracts) β | |
| β ββ Versioning System (backward compatibility) β | |
| β ββ Authentication/Authorization (capability-based) β | |
| β ββ Observability (distributed tracing, metrics) β | |
| βββββββββββββββββββββββββββββββββββββββββββββββββββββββββββ | |
| β | |
| βββββββββββββββββββββββββββββββββββββββββββββββββββββββββββ | |
| β Layer 1: Transport & Reliability β | |
| β ββ WebSocket/gRPC/HTTP protocols β | |
| β ββ Connection pooling (persistent channels) β | |
| β ββ Automatic reconnection (exponential backoff) β | |
| β ββ Message acknowledgment (at-least-once delivery) β | |
| β ββ Backpressure (flow control, queue limiting) β | |
| βββββββββββββββββββββββββββββββββββββββββββββββββββββββββββ | |
| ``` | |
| ### How Services Connect to MCP | |
| ``` | |
| Widget Services | |
| ββ Dashboard Shell β MCP Hub (register capabilities) | |
| ββ Calendar Widget β MCP Hub (publish events, subscribe to commands) | |
| ββ Notes Widget β MCP Hub (request context via CMA) | |
| ββ Status Widget β MCP Hub (reactive updates from SRAG) | |
| AI Services | |
| ββ CMA (Contextual Memory Agent) β MCP Hub (context queries) | |
| ββ SRAG (Structured RAG) β MCP Hub (knowledge synthesis) | |
| ββ Evolution Agent β MCP Hub (performance insights) | |
| ββ PAL (Personal AI Assistant) β MCP Hub (user preferences) | |
| Data Pipelines | |
| ββ ETL Pipeline β MCP Hub (ingest events) | |
| ββ Analytics Pipeline β MCP Hub (subscribe to usage events) | |
| ββ Audit Log β MCP Hub (append-only event stream) | |
| All Connected Via MCP Protocol | |
| β | |
| Reliable, Type-Safe, Scalable, Observable | |
| ``` | |
| --- | |
| ## π― HOW MCP SOLVES THE 10 "EARTH-ROCKING" REQUIREMENTS | |
| ### Gap #1: MCP as Architectural Foundation β SOLVED | |
| **Requirement**: Reliable inter-component messaging | |
| **Solution**: MCP Hub becomes central nervous system | |
| **Deliverable**: MCP Platform Architect (Dec 1-31, Jan-Feb) | |
| **Result**: All components talk safely, reliably, type-safely | |
| ### Gap #2: Multi-Service AI Agent Architecture β SOLVED | |
| **Requirement**: CMA, SRAG, Evolution, PAL, Widget Services orchestrated | |
| **Solution**: MCP Service Adapters for each service | |
| **Deliverable**: Service Adapter patterns (5 built-in adapters) | |
| **Result**: Services compose without tight coupling | |
| ### Gap #3: SQLite Bottleneck β PostgreSQL β SOLVED | |
| **Requirement**: Scale from SQLite to enterprise DB | |
| **Solution**: MCP enables data service isolation (not directly in MCP) | |
| **Deliverable**: Database Architect (Nov 20-Dec 20, then ongoing) | |
| **Result**: PostgreSQL + pgvector by Dec 20 | |
| ### Gap #4: Evolution & KPI Monitor with Safeguards β SOLVED | |
| **Requirement**: Evolution Agent improves performance safely | |
| **Solution**: MCP enables event-driven improvement signals | |
| **Deliverable**: Evolution Agent service via MCP | |
| **Result**: Safe, observable performance improvement loops | |
| ### Gap #5: Authentication & Multi-Tenancy β SOLVED | |
| **Requirement**: Enterprise auth, multi-tenant isolation | |
| **Solution**: MCP capability-based auth (which user/org can access what) | |
| **Deliverable**: Security Architect (Nov 20-Dec 20, then ongoing) | |
| **Result**: Type-safe, auditable multi-tenancy | |
| ### Gap #6: SRAG Architecture β SOLVED | |
| **Requirement**: RAG service integrated with widgets | |
| **Solution**: SRAG publishes results via MCP protocol | |
| **Deliverable**: SRAG Service Adapter (Jan-Feb) | |
| **Result**: Widgets consume knowledge safely | |
| ### Gap #7: Frontend-Backend Contract β SOLVED | |
| **Requirement**: Type safety from frontend to backend | |
| **Solution**: MCP schema enforcement (JSON Schema β TypeScript) | |
| **Deliverable**: Widget SDK with type generation | |
| **Result**: Compile-time errors, not runtime surprises | |
| ### Gap #8: WebSocket Architecture β SOLVED | |
| **Requirement**: Real-time updates, push notifications | |
| **Solution**: MCP handles reconnection, ordering, reliability | |
| **Deliverable**: MCP Transport Layer (WebSocket + fallbacks) | |
| **Result**: Reliable real-time, no lost updates | |
| ### Gap #9: Testing & Observability β SOLVED | |
| **Requirement**: Understand system behavior in production | |
| **Solution**: MCP observability layer (trace all messages) | |
| **Deliverable**: Distributed tracing + metrics (OpenTelemetry via MCP) | |
| **Result**: Production blindness eliminated (SRE, Jan-Feb) | |
| ### Gap #10: UI State Management + AI State Sync β SOLVED | |
| **Requirement**: UI state consistent with server AI state | |
| **Solution**: MCP as single source of truth for state events | |
| **Deliverable**: State Sync Service (Phase 2) | |
| **Result**: No split-brain state issues | |
| --- | |
| ## π MCP PLATFORM ARCHITECT ROLE | |
| ### Position Details | |
| **Title**: MCP Platform Architect | |
| **Level**: Senior (10+ years distributed systems) | |
| **Start Date**: December 1, 2025 | |
| **Duration**: 6 months (minimum) | |
| **Budget**: β¬80-120K (3-6 month contract) | |
| **Authority**: Reports to Chief Architect, owns MCP Foundation | |
| **Status**: π΄ CRITICAL HIRE (moved from Jan 1 to Dec 1) | |
| ### Responsibilities (Dec 1-31, then ongoing) | |
| #### Week 1-2 (Dec 1-10): Foundation Assessment & Planning | |
| - [ ] Assess current MCP requirements from Phase 1.B | |
| - [ ] Design MCP Hub architecture (scalability, reliability) | |
| - [ ] Plan Schema Registry implementation (versioning strategy) | |
| - [ ] Design Service Adapter patterns (5 core types) | |
| - [ ] Create MCP implementation roadmap | |
| #### Week 3-4 (Dec 11-20): Core Implementation | |
| - [ ] Implement MCP Hub (message broker core) | |
| - [ ] Implement Schema Registry (JSON Schema validation) | |
| - [ ] Build 2-3 Service Adapters (proof of concept) | |
| - [ ] Implement connection pooling + reconnection logic | |
| - [ ] Create MCP CLI tools for local development | |
| #### Phase 1.C (Dec 16-20): Integration & Testing | |
| - [ ] Integrate MCP with Dashboard Shell | |
| - [ ] Integrate MCP with Widget Registry 2.0 | |
| - [ ] Integrate MCP with Audit Log (event stream) | |
| - [ ] Create comprehensive MCP documentation | |
| - [ ] Establish MCP performance baselines | |
| #### Phase 2 (Jan-Feb): Production Hardening | |
| - [ ] Scale MCP Hub for multi-region deployment | |
| - [ ] Implement MCP observability (distributed tracing) | |
| - [ ] Build remaining Service Adapters (10+ total) | |
| - [ ] MCP security hardening (encryption, auth) | |
| - [ ] Production deployment procedures | |
| ### Key Deliverables | |
| **By Dec 20 (Phase 1.C Completion)**: | |
| - β MCP Hub operational (message ordering, reliability proven) | |
| - β Schema Registry functional (3+ schemas in production) | |
| - β 3 Service Adapters built (Dashboard, Widget Registry, Audit Log) | |
| - β MCP CLI tools available to team | |
| - β Documentation complete | |
| **By Jan 31 (Phase 2 Kickoff)**: | |
| - β MCP supports all core services (CMA, SRAG, Evolution, PAL) | |
| - β 10+ Service Adapters available (extensibility proven) | |
| - β Distributed tracing operational (observability complete) | |
| - β Multi-region deployment tested (scalability ready) | |
| **By Feb 28 (Production Ready)**: | |
| - β MCP certified production-ready (quality gates passed) | |
| - β Developer ecosystem ready (docs, SDKs, examples) | |
| - β Performance targets achieved (latency <100ms p99) | |
| - β Security audit passed (encryption, auth, GDPR) | |
| --- | |
| ## π§ MCP HUB IMPLEMENTATION STRATEGY | |
| ### Core Component: Message Broker | |
| ```typescript | |
| interface MCPMessage { | |
| id: string; // UUID | |
| timestamp: Date; // ISO 8601 | |
| sender: ServiceIdentity; // Which service sent this | |
| receiver: ServiceCapability; // Which capability it targets | |
| schemaId: string; // JSON Schema version | |
| payload: Record<string, unknown>; // Type-checked against schema | |
| // Reliability guarantees | |
| sequenceNumber: number; // Strict ordering | |
| acknowledgedAt?: Date; // When receiver confirmed | |
| retries: number; // Retry count | |
| // Tracing | |
| traceId: string; // Distributed tracing | |
| spanId: string; // OpenTelemetry | |
| baggage: Record<string, string>; // Context propagation | |
| } | |
| ``` | |
| ### Schema Registry: Type Safety | |
| ```typescript | |
| interface MCPSchema { | |
| id: string; // e.g., "widget:register/v1" | |
| version: string; // SemVer (1.0.0) | |
| jsonSchema: JSONSchema; // JSON Schema definition | |
| typescript?: string; // Generated TypeScript interface | |
| // Versioning | |
| compatibleVersions: string[]; // Which versions accept this | |
| deprecationDate?: Date; // Scheduled removal | |
| // Governance | |
| owner: ServiceIdentity; // Which service owns this schema | |
| reviewedBy: string[]; // Security/Architecture approval | |
| tags: string[]; // For discovery | |
| } | |
| ``` | |
| ### Service Adapter Pattern | |
| ```typescript | |
| interface ServiceAdapter { | |
| // Registration | |
| serviceName: string; // e.g., "dashboard-shell" | |
| capabilities: MCPCapability[]; // What this service provides | |
| // Message handlers | |
| handlers: { | |
| [messageType: string]: (message: MCPMessage, context: ExecutionContext) => Promise<MCPMessage>; | |
| }; | |
| // Connection management | |
| onConnect: () => Promise<void>; // Called when connected | |
| onDisconnect: () => Promise<void>; // Called when disconnected | |
| onReconnect: () => Promise<void>; // Called after reconnection | |
| // Error handling | |
| onError: (error: Error) => Promise<void>; | |
| maxRetries: number; | |
| backoffStrategy: BackoffStrategy; | |
| } | |
| ``` | |
| ### Reliability Guarantees | |
| **Message Ordering**: | |
| ``` | |
| Message 1 β [Broker] β Service A (seq: 001) | |
| Message 2 β [Broker] β Service A (seq: 002) | |
| Message 3 β [Broker] β Service A (seq: 003) | |
| β | |
| Guaranteed delivery in order, no out-of-order processing | |
| ``` | |
| **Automatic Reconnection**: | |
| ``` | |
| Connection Lost | |
| β | |
| Exponential backoff: 100ms β 200ms β 400ms β 800ms (max 30s) | |
| β | |
| On reconnect: | |
| - Replay missed messages (stored in broker queue) | |
| - Verify sequence numbers match | |
| - Resume processing | |
| ``` | |
| **Backpressure Handling**: | |
| ``` | |
| Slow Consumer A has 1000 messages queued | |
| β | |
| MCP detects backpressure (queue > threshold) | |
| β | |
| Applies flow control: | |
| - Producers slow down (wait for consumer to catch up) | |
| - Queue size managed (prevent memory explosion) | |
| - Metrics track latency | |
| ``` | |
| --- | |
| ## π§© WIDGET SDK: Type-Safe Plugin Development | |
| ### What Developers Get | |
| ```typescript | |
| // 1. Type-safe widget definition | |
| import { MCP, Widget } from '@widgetboard/sdk'; | |
| @Widget({ | |
| id: 'my-widget/1.0.0', | |
| capabilities: ['read:notes', 'write:audit', 'subscribe:context'], | |
| }) | |
| export class MyWidget { | |
| constructor(private mcp: MCP) {} | |
| // 2. Strongly-typed message handlers | |
| @MCP.Handler('notes:updated/v1') | |
| async onNotesUpdated(event: NotesUpdatedEvent) { | |
| // Type-safe: event is known to have 'id', 'content', etc. | |
| console.log(`Note ${event.id} updated: ${event.content}`); | |
| } | |
| // 3. Type-safe service calls | |
| async requestContext() { | |
| const context = await this.mcp.call('cma:get-context/v1', { | |
| userId: this.currentUser.id, | |
| includeHistory: true, | |
| }); | |
| // Type-safe: context has known structure | |
| } | |
| // 4. Type-safe subscriptions | |
| async subscribeToUpdates() { | |
| this.mcp.subscribe('widget:state-changed/v1', async event => { | |
| // Type-safe: event structure validated | |
| await this.handleStateChange(event); | |
| }); | |
| } | |
| } | |
| ``` | |
| ### Schema-Driven Code Generation | |
| ```bash | |
| # Developer defines schema | |
| $ cat events/notes-updated.schema.json | |
| { | |
| "type": "object", | |
| "properties": { | |
| "id": { "type": "string" }, | |
| "content": { "type": "string" }, | |
| "updatedAt": { "type": "string", "format": "date-time" } | |
| } | |
| } | |
| # MCP SDK generates TypeScript | |
| $ mcp-sdk generate --schema events/ | |
| β Generated: events/types.ts | |
| # Developer uses generated types | |
| import { NotesUpdatedEvent } from './events/types'; | |
| const handler = (event: NotesUpdatedEvent) => { ... } | |
| ``` | |
| --- | |
| ## π INTEGRATION TIMELINE | |
| ### Phase 1.B (Dec 1-15): Foundation | |
| **Week 1 (Dec 1-5)**: | |
| - MCP Platform Architect starts (Day 1) | |
| - MCP Hub baseline implementation (message broker core) | |
| - Schema Registry v1 (JSON Schema validation) | |
| - First Service Adapter (Dashboard Shell) | |
| - Team training on MCP concepts | |
| **Week 2 (Dec 6-10)**: | |
| - MCP Hub alpha testing (stress testing, reliability) | |
| - Service Adapter #2 (Widget Registry 2.0) | |
| - Service Adapter #3 (Audit Log) | |
| - MCP CLI tools (local development) | |
| - Documentation first draft | |
| **Week 3 (Dec 11-15)**: | |
| - MCP Hub production-ready (performance targets met) | |
| - Quality gate MCP integration (automated checks) | |
| - MCP security review (encryption, auth) | |
| - Team certification (all developers know MCP) | |
| - Deployment procedures validated | |
| ### Phase 1.C (Dec 16-20): Deployment | |
| **Full Week (Dec 16-20)**: | |
| - MCP Foundation goes live (all services migrated) | |
| - Dashboard Shell fully integrated | |
| - Widget Registry 2.0 on MCP | |
| - Audit Log on MCP event stream | |
| - E2E testing of MCP reliability | |
| - Final production readiness assessment | |
| ### Phase 2.A (Jan 1 - Jan 31): Expansion | |
| - Integrate CMA (Contextual Memory Agent) | |
| - Integrate SRAG (Structured RAG) | |
| - Build 5+ additional Service Adapters | |
| - MCP observability (distributed tracing) | |
| - Scale testing (multi-region preparation) | |
| ### Phase 2.B (Feb 1 - Feb 28): Production | |
| - Integrate all remaining services | |
| - Multi-region deployment | |
| - Production hardening (performance tuning) | |
| - Security certification | |
| - Go-live preparation | |
| --- | |
| ## π COMPETITIVE ADVANTAGE | |
| ### Why MCP Foundation Creates a Moat | |
| **1. Developer Experience** | |
| ``` | |
| Traditional: "Write your own message queue handling" | |
| MCP: "Use type-safe SDKs, battle-tested patterns" | |
| β Faster development, fewer bugs, happy developers | |
| ``` | |
| **2. Ecosystem Lock-in** | |
| ``` | |
| Widget developers standardize on MCP | |
| β Can't easily switch to competitor's platform | |
| β Network effect as more widgets available | |
| β β¬10M ARR becomes defensible | |
| ``` | |
| **3. Reliability at Scale** | |
| ``` | |
| Competitors: "Hope our messaging works in production" | |
| WidgetBoard: "MCP guarantees ordering, delivery, recovery" | |
| β Enterprise customers trust our platform | |
| β SLA compliance becomes standard | |
| ``` | |
| **4. Open Extensibility** | |
| ``` | |
| Competitors: "Our closed system only" | |
| WidgetBoard: "Open MCP ecosystemβbuild plugins, publish to marketplace" | |
| β Community contributes widgets | |
| β Competitive advantage grows over time | |
| ``` | |
| --- | |
| ## π° BUSINESS IMPACT | |
| ### Why β¬10M ARR Depends on MCP Foundation | |
| **Without MCP**: | |
| - β Real-time features unreliable | |
| - β Widget integration brittle | |
| - β Enterprise customers hesitant (no reliability guarantees) | |
| - β Competitor catches up easily | |
| - β 60% confidence in Phase 1 delivery (too risky) | |
| **With MCP Foundation**: | |
| - β Real-time features reliable (message ordering, recovery) | |
| - β Widget ecosystem extensible (open plugin system) | |
| - β Enterprise customers confident (SLA compliance) | |
| - β Competitive moat (hard to replicate) | |
| - β 90% confidence in Phase 1 delivery (manageable risk) | |
| **ROI Calculation**: | |
| ``` | |
| Cost of MCP Platform Architect: β¬80-120K | |
| Cost of MCP Hub implementation: Included in Phase 1.B | |
| β Total MCP cost: ~β¬100K | |
| Value from β¬10M ARR achievable: β¬10M+ gross revenue | |
| Value from 2-year recurring customers: β¬20M+ total | |
| β MCP ROI: 100-200x | |
| ``` | |
| --- | |
| ## β SUCCESS CRITERIA | |
| ### By Dec 20 (Phase 1.C Completion) | |
| - β MCP Hub operational in production | |
| - β 3+ Service Adapters live (Dashboard, Registry, Audit) | |
| - β All 30 agents using MCP for inter-service communication | |
| - β Performance baseline: message latency <50ms p99 | |
| - β Reliability baseline: 99.9% uptime proven | |
| - β Security baseline: encryption, auth, audit trail working | |
| - β Developer documentation complete | |
| - β Quality gate: MCP certifies "production-ready" | |
| ### By Jan 31 (Phase 2 Kickoff) | |
| - β 5+ Service Adapters available | |
| - β CMA, SRAG, Evolution Agent integrated via MCP | |
| - β Distributed tracing operational | |
| - β Multi-region deployment tested | |
| - β 10+ sample widgets demonstrating extensibility | |
| ### By Feb 28 (Production Ready) | |
| - β MCP Foundation certified production-ready | |
| - β All widgets on MCP protocol | |
| - β 99.95% uptime SLA achieved | |
| - β Throughput target: 10,000+ messages/sec | |
| - β Developer ecosystem ready (SDKs, docs, examples, marketplace) | |
| --- | |
| ## π¬ NEXT IMMEDIATE ACTIONS | |
| ### Dec 1 (Phase 1.B Kickoff) | |
| - [ ] MCP Platform Architect starts onboarding | |
| - [ ] Provide MCP architectural requirements to architect | |
| - [ ] Begin MCP Hub implementation (baseline) | |
| - [ ] Start training team on MCP concepts | |
| ### Dec 5 (Quality Checkpoint) | |
| - [ ] MCP Hub alpha tested | |
| - [ ] First Service Adapter working | |
| - [ ] Performance baselines established | |
| - [ ] Team training complete | |
| ### Dec 10 (Mid-Phase Checkpoint) | |
| - [ ] MCP Hub production-ready | |
| - [ ] 3 Service Adapters working | |
| - [ ] Security review passed | |
| - [ ] MCP CLI tools available | |
| ### Dec 15 (Phase Completion) | |
| - [ ] MCP Foundation deployed to production | |
| - [ ] All services migrated to MCP | |
| - [ ] Quality gate: MCP certified production-ready | |
| - [ ] Team ready for Phase 2 | |
| --- | |
| ## π MCP FOUNDATION RESOURCES | |
| ### Documentation | |
| - **MCP Protocol Spec**: [Standard MCP specification](https://modelcontextprotocol.io) | |
| - **Widget SDK Guide**: `docs/MCP_WIDGET_SDK.md` (to be created) | |
| - **Service Adapter Patterns**: `docs/SERVICE_ADAPTERS.md` (to be created) | |
| - **Observability Guide**: `docs/MCP_OBSERVABILITY.md` (to be created) | |
| ### Team Contacts | |
| - **MCP Platform Architect**: Hired Dec 1 (tbd) | |
| - **Chief Architect**: Escalation authority | |
| - **Backend Lead**: MCP Hub coordination | |
| - **Frontend Lead**: Widget SDK integration | |
| --- | |
| ## ποΈ VISION | |
| > **WidgetBoard's competitive advantage is not complex AI featuresβit's a ROCK-SOLID, EXTENSIBLE, OPEN platform foundation that enterprise customers can trust and developers can build on.** | |
| **That foundation is the MCP Foundation.** | |
| --- | |
| **Status**: π’ READY FOR IMPLEMENTATION | |
| **Authority**: System Director (Claus) | |
| **Next**: Hire MCP Platform Architect (Dec 1) | |
| **Go-Live**: Dec 20, 2025 (Phase 1.C completion) | |
| --- | |
| _This document defines the architectural strategy that makes WidgetBoard's β¬10M ARR achievable._ | |