@WestonG40 Absolutely

What MCP can do for your use case

MCP is very good at the GitHub‑related parts of your workflow:

• Expose a GitHub repository or selected files to the model (via the GitHub MCP server)

• Control exactly what the model can access (you decide which tools are available)

• Provide deterministic, auditable inputs (the model only sees what your MCP tools expose)

This covers your step:

1. “Assign a few files or a repository to the chat.”

What MCP cannot do by itself

From the GitHub maintainer’s reply:

“You cannot use our MCP to pull down URLs for research outside of GitHub content.”

This means:

• MCP cannot fetch arbitrary websites

• MCP cannot enforce “only use these 3 URLs” unless you build that logic yourself

• MCP cannot return citations automatically — you must implement that behavior in your tools or UI

So your step:

2. “In the prompt I mention 3 websites to be also considered.”

…requires your own custom tool, not just MCP.

What a complete solution looks like

To replicate the Copilot Web UI behavior, you would build:

1. Your own MCP server

This server would expose:

• A GitHub tool (via GitHub’s MCP server or your wrapper)

• A Web‑fetch tool (your own code that fetches only the 3 allowed URLs)

• A Source‑tracking tool (optional: returns metadata about what was used)

2. A custom UI

Your UI would:

• Let the user “attach” files or repos

• Let the user specify the 3 allowed websites

• Send these as structured inputs to the model

• Display the model’s answer + the sources your tools report

3. A policy layer

This enforces:

• “Only use these files and these URLs”

• “Do not access anything else”

• “Return citations for every piece of information”

This is not something the model enforces automatically — you enforce it by controlling the tools.

How the workflow would look in practice

Step A — User selects files + URLs

Your UI sends something like:

{
  "allowed_files": ["repo/path/a.md", "repo/path/b.md"],
  "allowed_urls": ["https://site1.com", "https://site2.com", "https://site3.com"]
}

Step B — Your MCP tools fetch only those

• GitHub tool → returns file contents

• Web tool → fetches only the allowed URLs

• Both return metadata for citation tracking

Step C — Model receives a structured context package

Not raw internet access — only what you explicitly provide.

Step D — Model answers and includes citations

Because your tools return structured metadata, the model can cite them.

When MCP is the right choice

MCP is ideal if you want:

• Strict control over what the model can access

• Deterministic inputs (files, URLs, structured data)

• A custom UI that behaves like Copilot Web but tailored to your workflow

• A secure boundary (model cannot “escape” and browse the internet)

This matches your scenario very well.

When MCP is not enough by itself

If you expect:

• Automatic web browsing

• Automatic citation extraction

• Automatic “only use these sources” enforcement

…then MCP alone won’t do it. But MCP + your own small tools absolutely can.

A simple architecture recommendation

This is the closest equivalent to the Copilot Web UI — but fully under your control.