enable tool approval

[anubra266]

No description provided.

[changeset-bot]

⚠️ No Changeset found

Latest commit: 1a34c11

Merging this PR will not cause a version bump for any packages. If these changes should not result in a new version, you're good to go. If these changes should result in a version bump, you need to add a changeset.

This PR includes no changesets

When changesets are added to this PR, you'll see the packages that this PR includes changesets for and the associated semver types

Click here to learn what changesets are, and how to add one.

Click here if you're a maintainer who wants to add a changeset to this PR

[vercel]

The latest updates on your projects. Learn more about Vercel for GitHub.

Project	Deployment	Review	Updated (UTC)
agents-manage-api	Ready	Preview, Comment	Jan 6, 2026 8:00pm
agents-manage-ui	Ready	Preview, Comment	Jan 6, 2026 8:00pm
agents-run-api	Ready	Preview, Comment	Jan 6, 2026 8:00pm

1 Skipped Deployment

Project	Deployment	Review	Updated (UTC)
agents-docs	Skipped		Jan 6, 2026 8:00pm

[claude]

Claude finished @anubra266's task —— View job

---

Comprehensive Code Review: "Enable Tool Approval"

Change Summary

This PR enables the tool approval UI in the MCP Node Editor by making previously hidden functionality visible:

1. Uncommenting the Shield icon import (lucide-react)
2. Revealing the "Needs Approval?" column header with tooltip
3. Making approval checkboxes visible by removing hidden CSS class

The underlying functionality was already implemented but hidden from users.

Review Findings

✅ Positive Aspects

System Integration: The change integrates well with the existing tool approval architecture:

• Backend support exists in AgentSession.ts with needsApproval field in ToolCallData
• Runtime approval flow is implemented via /api/tool-approvals endpoint
• UI components exist for handling approvals (tool-approval.tsx)
• Data serialization properly handles tempToolPolicies in serialize.ts:205-224

Code Quality: Clean, minimal change that simply reveals existing functionality rather than adding new complexity.

⚠️ Areas for Consideration

1. Missing Changeset (Build Process)

The changeset bot flagged this PR as needing a changeset. Since this enables a user-facing feature, it likely warrants a version bump.

Recommendation: Add a changeset describing the feature enablement.

2. Incomplete Feature Validation

While the UI is now visible, there are several questions about feature completeness:

Backend Validation:

• Does the approval flow work end-to-end from UI → database → runtime?
• Are the tempToolPolicies properly persisted when saving agent configurations?

Testing Coverage:

• No tests appear to validate the approval checkbox interactions
• Missing integration tests for the approval workflow

Recommendation: Verify the complete approval flow works before releasing to users.

3. User Experience Considerations

Discovery & Education:

• The tooltip explains what approval does, but users may not understand the runtime implications
• No clear indication of how approvals affect agent execution flow

State Management:

• The tempToolPolicies approach works for UI state, but the relationship between temporary and persisted state could be clearer
• Users might not understand when their approval settings are actually saved

Recommendation: Consider adding documentation or in-app guidance about tool approvals.

4. System Design & Architecture

Consistency: The approval functionality follows established patterns:

• Uses the same temporary state management as tool selection (tempSelectedTools)
• Integrates with existing AgentToolConfigLookup type system
• Follows the relationship-based configuration model

Extensibility: Well-positioned for future enhancements:

• ToolPolicy interface already includes extension points (commented future fields)
• McpToolSelection type supports both simple and complex configurations

Performance: Minimal impact - just UI visibility changes with existing event handlers.

5. Edge Cases & Error Handling

Orphaned Tools: The code properly handles approval policies for orphaned tools (tools selected but no longer available), which is good defensive programming.

State Consistency: When deselecting a tool, the code properly removes its approval policy (lines 131-134), preventing stale policies.

6. Security Considerations

Authorization: The approval system adds a security layer by requiring explicit user confirmation for sensitive tools.

Audit Trail: Tool approvals are logged through the conversation system, providing accountability.

📝 Recommendations

Immediate (Required)

1. Add changeset for proper version management
2. Test end-to-end approval flow to ensure feature works completely
3. Verify data persistence of tool policies when saving agents

Short-term (Recommended)

4. Add integration tests for approval checkbox interactions
5. Document approval behavior for users (in-app or docs)
6. Consider UX improvements: visual indicators for tools requiring approval

Long-term (Consider)

7. Bulk approval operations: Allow setting approval for multiple tools at once
8. Approval templates: Pre-configured approval policies for common tool categories

🎯 Verdict

This is a well-architected change that safely enables existing functionality. The code quality is good and follows established patterns. However, the feature should be thoroughly tested end-to-end before release, and a changeset should be added.

The change demonstrates good software engineering practices by:

• Building the complete feature before exposing it
• Using progressive disclosure to manage complexity
• Following existing architectural patterns
• Handling edge cases properly

Approval: ✅ Approve with requested changes (add changeset + verify end-to-end functionality)

---