DOOM MCP vs Trainly

Chris Nager built a fully playable DOOM that runs as an MCP (Model Context Protocol) app, rendering inline inside Claude and ChatGPT without a separate browser tab. The architecture uses two MCP tools — create_doom_session for inline-capable hosts and get_doom_launch_url as a browser fallback — combined with cloudflare/doom-wasm for the game runtime and a signed token system that maintains session state across both surfaces. The result is the same session whether you're playing inline or in a tab. The key technical challenge was avoiding iframe and CSP (Content Security Policy) issues. Rather than embedding a browser page inside the MCP iframe, the DOOM canvas runs directly inside the host's iframe — a subtle but critical distinction that resolved a class of rendering and input-handling bugs. The final implementation is intentionally stripped down: no save/load, no persistence adapters, just stable playable DOOM. Beyond the novelty, this project is a concrete demonstration that MCP apps are interactive surfaces, not just tool-calling JSON endpoints. The progressive enhancement pattern — same signed-token foundation serving both inline and browser modes — is a reusable architecture for any game or interactive experience that wants to live inside an AI assistant. Nager open-sourced the implementation and the blog post is a detailed technical breakdown.

Trainly is an observability platform for AI pipelines that focuses on the problems most monitoring tools miss: cost concentration (which endpoints or users are burning your budget), blind spots (what percentage of your traffic is invisible to current monitoring), and drift (week-over-week regressions in latency, cost, and error rates that creep up unnoticed). The hook is a free 72-hour audit with no credit card and no commitment — just add a one-line decorator to your AI pipeline and Trainly processes your traces. Their example claim is provocative: "We found $2,400/mo in wasted GPT-4 calls in the first report." Whether that's typical or cherry-picked, the underlying problem is real: most teams running AI in production have no idea which calls are delivering value vs. silently failing or over-spending. The platform stores traces securely and deletes them on request, though they note you shouldn't pipe in data containing sensitive PII. The core value proposition is straightforward — production AI pipelines are opaque, and cost anomalies compound quickly when you're paying per-token. For teams spending $5K+/month on AI APIs, even a 10% optimization is meaningful, and a free audit to find that is a reasonable offer.