Google A2A marks a major step forward in standardizing how AI agents communicate. The announcement came on April 9, 2025, with more than 50 tech giants like Atlassian, Salesforce, and PayPal backing the initiative. A2A's main focus lets agents talk directly to each other across platforms. Anthropic's Model Context Protocol (MCP) has emerged alongside it as a standard that provides context to large language models.

These protocols play different but connected roles in the AI world. A2A uses common standards like HTTP and JSON-RPC to make secure information sharing and task coordination between agents easier. On top of that, it creates a framework for secure, two-way connections between models and external tools that improves AI workflow's context awareness.

This piece explores how these protocols work together to shape AI integration's future. You'll learn about their architectures, communication models, and implementation details to understand when and how to use each protocol in your projects. The standards can improve your AI applications while you retain enterprise-grade security and scalability.

‍

Protocol Architecture: How Google A2A and MCP Are Structured

Google A2A and MCP protocols have unique architectures that serve different purposes in the AI ecosystem. These protocols don't compete directly. They target different aspects of the AI agent landscape while focusing on standardization, security, and interoperability.

‍

Agent Card Discovery in google a2a protocol

Google A2A's core strength lies in its discovery mechanism. Agents showcase themselves through a public Agent Card – a digital business card in JSON format that typically lives at /.well-known/agent.json. This discovery system forms the foundation of the protocol and helps agents find and review potential collaborators without any setup.

Each Agent Card has essential metadata:

Hosted/DNS information that shows where to find the agent
Version information to track compatibility
A structured list of skills showing capabilities
Authentication needs and schemes (like OAuth2 or API keys)
Default input and output formats the agent can work with

This capability showcase lets client agents find the right partner agents for specific tasks automatically. Unlike traditional API directories, the discovery process adapts naturally. Agent ecosystems can grow and change without hard-coded connections.

‍

MCP Host, Client, and Server Roles Explained

The Model Context Protocol uses a three-tiered architecture built on JSON-RPC. This creates clear boundaries between components:

MCP Hosts act as central coordinators. User-facing applications like Claude Desktop, development environments, or custom AI assistants typically play this role. Hosts manage client instances, enforce security policies, and coordinate AI integration. They create the application boundary where users interact with AI features.
MCP Clients work one-on-one with servers inside the host application. They handle protocol negotiation, create stateful sessions, and route messages between the host and server. This dedicated connection keeps everything secure and isolated.
MCP Servers share specific capabilities by wrapping external resources, APIs, or tools. They process requests through clients and support both local and remote services. Any third party can develop servers, which promotes an open ecosystem of integrations.

This setup lets hosts connect to multiple servers at once. AI applications can access various data sources and tools through one consistent interface.

‍

Task Lifecycle in A2A vs Context Injection in MCP

These protocols handle AI workflows quite differently:

A2A builds everything around Tasks - specific units with unique IDs that move through defined states:

submitted → working → input-required → completed/failed/canceled

This task-based approach works great for complex interactions with multiple stages and uncertain outcomes. A2A uses natural language for agent communication, which makes it perfect for teamwork scenarios that need flexibility. The protocol tracks state changes and provides status updates through polling, streaming, or notifications.

MCP takes a different path with Context Injection - giving models the right information when they need it. Instead of tracking task states, MCP structures everything around three main elements:

Tools (functions that let models take action)
Resources (organized data that provides context)
Prompts (ready-to-use templates)

MCP shines when handling precise, single operations with clear inputs and outputs. Models can easily access external data and functions without extensive training. This makes it valuable for tool-driven applications.

These architectural differences show how both protocols enhance the growing AI agent ecosystem in their own ways.

‍

Communication Models and Message Flow Comparison

The communication patterns of Google A2A and MCP show how these protocols make information flow easier between AI components. Each protocol works best in different interaction scenarios.

‍

Request/Response and SSE in google a2a protocol features

Google A2A protocol supports three different communication patterns based on task complexity and duration. The protocol implements a traditional request/response with polling mechanism where client agents check for updates at intervals for simple interactions. The protocol really stands out with its Server-Sent Events (SSE) capabilities.

SSE lets you stream updates for tasks that need continuous feedback. A client starts a task using the tasks/sendSubscribe method, and the server creates a lasting connection. Through this connection, it sends immediate status updates and early results without needing multiple requests. This makes SSE perfect for quick tasks where instant feedback creates a better user experience.

Some operations might take hours or days to finish. A2A uses push notifications for these cases. The remote agent lets the client know once the task is done. This strategy avoids timeout issues and keeps the communication flowing smoothly.

A2A messages stick to JSON-RPC 2.0 specifications. This creates a standard structure for method calls, parameter passing, and result handling. The foundation guarantees consistent message exchange no matter what internal frameworks the agents use.

‍

Tool Invocation and Prompt Injection in MCP

MCP's tool invocation system gives LLMs a standard way to access external capabilities. Each tool comes with:

A descriptive name and easy-to-read description
A JSON schema that defines expected parameters
Optional notes about behavior (such as whether it's read-only)

Models generate a structured request through the tools/call endpoint when they need to use a tool. They pass the tool name and arguments that match the declared schema. The server runs the requested operation and sends back results in a format the model can understand.

This powerful system brings security concerns, especially about prompt injection attacks. MCP integrates external content into LLM contexts, so malicious inputs could trick the model if they look like valid prompts. MCP implementations need to address these risks:

The system HTML-encodes untrusted content by default
Developers must explicitly allow unsafe content
The protocol limits what servers can see in prompts

MCP puts errors in the tool result instead of handling them at the protocol level. This lets models understand failures and fix issues if needed. If a database query fails, error details show up in the content array with an isError: true flag.

‍

Artifact Exchange vs Resource Access

These protocols handle data transfer differently. A2A uses Artifacts as containers for task outputs. Parts within these artifacts can include text, files, or structured JSON data. The artifacts package complete, self-contained results from the remote agent's work.

A remote agent might return an artifact with multiple parts after finishing a data analysis task. The artifact could contain text explanations, a chart image, and structured JSON with raw findings - all neatly packaged with clear content types.

MCP takes a different approach with Resources as context elements that clients can access. Unlike A2A's task-focused artifacts, MCP resources represent existing data that gives context to language models. Each resource has its own URI and clients can get it through standard endpoints.

This difference shows how they complement each other. A2A excels at packaging and delivering multimodal results between independent agents. MCP specializes in giving structured context to language models within a system.

A2A artifacts usually move from remote to client agents. MCP resources work both ways - clients can read and sometimes write to resources, depending on the server's features and security rules.

‍

Materials and Methods: Implementing A2A and MCP in Real Systems

You need different technical approaches to implement the Google A2A protocol and MCP based on their architectural designs. Developers should understand how these protocols work in real-life systems to deploy them properly.

‍

Setting Up A2A Agent Cards and Endpoints

A2A implementation begins with an Agent Card - a JSON metadata file that lives at /.well-known/agent.json. This file serves as your agent's digital identity and has vital information:

Name and description of your agent
URL endpoint where it can receive requests
Authentication requirements to secure access
Supported message formats and content types
Skills and capabilities the agent offers

Flask applications can implement this through a route that serves the Agent Card JSON when other agents try to find it. You'll also need API endpoints that handle the core A2A methods. The tasks/send endpoint that processes incoming task requests is particularly important.

‍

Integrating External Tools via MCP Servers

MCP uses a client-server architecture to connect language models with external capabilities. Here's how to integrate tools via MCP servers:

Pick your transport method - either standard input/output (stdio) for local servers or Server-Sent Events (SSE) for remote connections.
Set up your MCP server in Visual Studio Code by creating a .vscode/mcp.json file that defines server parameters.
Create tool definitions with clear names, descriptions, and input schemas that specify expected parameters.
Build request handlers for the tools/list endpoint to show available tools and tools/call endpoint to run tool functionality.

The Agent Development Kit (ADK) can use MCP servers through the MCPToolset class. This class finds available tools and turns them into ADK-compatible tool instances.

‍

Security Models: OAuth2 in A2A vs Custom Auth in MCP

Enterprise security was a top priority in designing the Google A2A protocol. The protocol supports all OAuth 2.0 authentication methods:

HTTP authentication (Basic, Bearer)
API Keys in headers or query parameters
OAuth 2.0 with OpenID Connect

A2A uses prominent web security standards instead of creating new authentication systems. This makes it compatible with existing identity systems right away.

MCP's early versions didn't have standardized authentication. This changed in March 2025 when new specifications standardized authorization using OAuth 2.1. The new standard requires PKCE (Proof Key for Code Exchange) from all clients to guard against common attacks. The latest MCP standard also added metadata discovery and dynamic client registration to make connections easier.

‍

Results and Discussion: Use Cases and Developer Trade-offs

Google A2A and MCP show their complementary strengths in today's evolving AI ecosystems. Organizations that use these protocols have discovered unique patterns in how they work best.

‍

Multi-Agent Collaboration in Enterprise Workflows

Companies now use autonomous agents to improve their critical processes. These agents help with everything from laptop purchases to customer service and supply chain planning. Internal standards show that agents working together succeed 90% of the time in a variety of domains. Teams of agents break complex tasks into smaller, manageable pieces that specialized agents can handle.

Here's a good example: hiring managers can use an accessible interface like Agentspace to guide their main agent to find matching candidates. The agent works with other specialized agents through Google A2A to find potential matches quickly. Each agent adds its expertise to reach the shared goal, and the well-laid-out task lifecycle makes sure everything runs smoothly.

‍

Tool-Driven LLM Applications with MCP

MCP connects AI systems to tools and data sources through standard interfaces. Block and Apollo have added MCP to their systems, though they use it differently than A2A. Development platforms like Zed, Replit, Codeium, and Sourcegraph use MCP to help AI agents get contextual information for coding tasks. This leads to better code with fewer attempts.

The protocol works just like a "USB-C port for AI applications". Any AI-powered tool can connect safely with any data source through common rules. This standard approach eliminates extra development work that would be needed for each new model-to-tool connection.

‍

When to Use A2A vs MCP in Hybrid Architectures

The best setup often uses both protocols based on what's needed. A2A works great when agent behavior needs to be flexible and workflows aren't fixed. MCP shines in situations that need security, lineage tracking, and controlled module deployment.

Many developers take a mixed approach. They use A2A for planning and coming up with ideas, while MCP modules handle the critical steps that need strict validation. Some systems even make A2A agents available through MCP server resources. This creates a complete system that uses the best of both protocols.

‍

Limitations and Interoperability Challenges

Google A2A and MCP have technical limitations that developers need to address when building integrated agent systems, despite their complementary design goals.

‍

Lack of Shared Memory in A2A Protocol

The A2A protocol has a simple constraint - agents operate across disconnected systems without shared memory, tools, or context. This design choice keeps agents specialized and contained to ensure security. Developers must pass all relevant information through task parameters or artifacts because no background shared state exists between agents. A2A agents remain secure by default, but developers face added complexity when they create multi-step workflows that need context preservation. Teams must build custom solutions to maintain state across agent interactions, often creating tracking layers outside the protocol.

‍

Authentication Gaps in Early MCP Versions

Enterprise adoption faced security challenges because early MCP versions didn't have standard authentication mechanisms. The protocol started with simple API Keys stored in environment variables, mainly for stdio transport. The authentication evolved through these stages:

Original version: Simple API Keys with minimal security
Later updates: Introduction of OAuth 2.1 as a standard authentication method
Current minimum: PKCE (Proof Key for Code Exchange) for all implementations
Recent additions: Metadata Discovery and Dynamic Client Registration

MCP's authentication model requires each server to be a complete Identity Provider. This requirement makes implementation complex for teams that want to develop simple tool integrations.

‍

Cross-Protocol Discovery and Compatibility Issues

A2A and MCP don't work together smoothly, which creates technical challenges. These protocols use different discovery mechanisms. A2A uses Agent Cards in .well-known directories that follow RFC 8615. MCP has its own discovery specification. Their subscribe models don't match, which makes it hard to use both protocols at once. Developer teams must maintain two implementations and create mapping layers between protocols. Industry experts worry that A2A and MCP might compete rather than work together, even though Google positions A2A as "complementary" to MCP.

‍

Conclusion

Google A2A and MCP have made big strides in creating standard ways for AI agents to communicate and manage context. These protocols serve different purposes in the growing AI ecosystem rather than competing with each other. A2A uses its task-oriented architecture to enable secure communication between agents. MCP adds strong context injection features for language models.

Both protocols work best together. A2A coordinates complex workflows between multiple agents in enterprise settings. This works especially well with tasks that need adaptive problem-solving. MCP adds value by integrating tools precisely and managing context. These features make it perfect for development environments and code-focused apps.

In spite of that, developers should think over the limitations of each protocol. A2A doesn't have shared memory and needs explicit context passing. MCP's authentication model requires a detailed identity provider setup. These issues point to areas where future versions of the protocols can improve and standardize.

The AI development community can benefit by a lot from becoming skilled at both protocols. Developers who understand their architectures, communication patterns, and security models can build AI applications that are more capable, secure and adaptable. These standards will likely alter the map of AI agent interactions and tool integration as they mature in the tech world.

‍

FAQs

Q1. What are the main differences between Google A2A and MCP protocols?

Google A2A focuses on agent-to-agent communication and task coordination, while MCP specializes in providing context to language models and integrating external tools. A2A uses a task-oriented approach, whereas MCP employs context injection and tool invocation.

Q2. How do these protocols handle security and authentication?

Google A2A supports various OAuth 2.0 authentication methods, including HTTP authentication and API keys. MCP has evolved to use OAuth 2.1 with PKCE (Proof Key for Code Exchange) as the minimum standard, along with metadata discovery and dynamic client registration.

Q3. What are the key components of the A2A protocol architecture?

The A2A protocol architecture is built around Agent Cards for discovery, a task lifecycle system, and support for multiple communication patterns including request/response, Server-Sent Events (SSE), and push notifications.

Q4. How does MCP facilitate tool integration for AI models?

MCP provides a standardized interface for language models to access external tools and resources. It uses a client-server architecture where tools are defined with clear schemas, and models can invoke them through specific endpoints like 'tools/call'.

Q5. When should developers consider using A2A vs MCP in their projects?

Developers should consider using A2A for complex, multi-agent collaborations and exploratory workflows, particularly in enterprise environments. MCP is better suited for scenarios requiring precise tool integration, security, and versioned module deployment, especially in development and coding-focused applications.

Google A2A vs MCP: The New Protocol Standard Developers Need to Know