Because there is no ai hype in LSP. AI is literally going through the same phase as early javascript libraries did. An explosion of tools, completely ignoring/bypassing previous accumulated knowledge, solving the wrong problems with the wrong tools.

And this will pile up the bloat stack, similar to js libraries, because new problems will rise from the wrong solutions, requiring even more wrong solutions to be incorporated in the stack.

did you actually think about the question or you just want to shout an opinion?

The question doesn't even make sense, there is no overlap between LSP and ACP

Your response is an exact proof of what I said in my comment. Thanks

Edit: Ok elaboration for the well intended. There is a HUGE overlap of LSP and ACP. LSP solves the problem of "oh we have many IDEs and many language integration plugins, we have an NxM problem, let's make it a N+M". ACP goes to do exactly that but for agents (which is an implementation detail), which means they could very well piggy back on top of LSP

This kind of arguments don't make sense because of scope creep. LSP is for programming languages, why would the maintainers of LSP consider AI agents as a valid language server? And ACP is useful beyond code editors that supporting LSP just for the sake of it makes even less sense.

The overlap being... they are both... protocols?