opencode-mcp

opencode_permission_list

Read-onlyIdempotent

List all pending permission requests across sessions to identify which are blocked awaiting approval for shell commands or file access outside the project.

Instructions

List all pending permission requests across all sessions. When a session is blocked waiting for approval (e.g. to run a shell command or access a file outside the project), it appears here. Respond with opencode_session_permission.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`directory`	No	Absolute path to the project directory. When provided, the request targets that project. If omitted, the OpenCode server uses its own working directory.

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`data`	No
`text`	Yes
`isError`	Yes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv3.0.0Sep 16, 2026

TDQS

A4.3/5.0

Behavior4/5

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and non-destructive behavior. The description adds useful behavioral context: it lists what kinds of requests appear (shell commands, file access) and instructs the agent to respond via a specific sibling tool. This goes beyond the annotations without contradicting them.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness5/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

Two sentences with no waste. The core purpose is front-loaded, and the follow-up instruction is placed immediately after. Efficient and well-structured.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness5/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

With an output schema present, return values are covered. The description explains the tool's scope, the trigger conditions, and the recommended follow-up action. For a simple listing tool, nothing essential is missing.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters3/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema description coverage is 100%, so the `directory` parameter is already fully documented. The tool description does not add additional semantics about the parameter, so the baseline of 3 is appropriate.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose5/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description states a specific verb ('List') and resource ('all pending permission requests across all sessions'), and distinguishes itself from the sibling `opencode_session_permission` by noting the global scope and providing concrete examples of what triggers a pending request (shell command, file access). This is clear and unambiguous.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines4/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

It explains when to use the tool: when a session is blocked waiting for approval, and provides the immediate next step by instructing to respond with `opencode_session_permission`. It doesn't explicitly exclude alternatives, but the context makes it obvious this is the tool for enumerating pending requests.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.

Deploy Server