Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
Human-In-the-Loop MCP Server

Human-In-the-Loop MCP Server

by GongRzhe
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Local

show_confirmation_dialog

Display a confirmation dialog with Yes/No buttons to get user approval before proceeding with an action.

Instructions

Show a confirmation dialog with Yes/No buttons.

This tool displays a message to the user and asks for confirmation. Perfect for getting approval before proceeding with an action.

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "title": "<title>",
      "message": "<message>"
    },
    "name": "show_confirmation_dialog"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
titleYesTitle of the confirmation dialog
messageYesThe message to show to the user

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.1.3

TDQS

A3.8/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

No annotations are provided, so description carries full burden. It states functionality but does not disclose return value, blocking behavior, or what happens upon user interaction. Lacks important behavioral details.

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 concise sentences with no fluff. Front-loaded purpose and immediate usage context. Every sentence adds value.

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

Completeness4/5

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

Adequate for a simple confirmation dialog with 2 params and existing output schema. Could improve by mentioning return value or modal behavior, but functional completeness is sufficient.

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 coverage is 100% with clear descriptions for both parameters. The tool description adds minimal extra meaning beyond 'get approval' context. Baseline 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?

Clearly states 'Show a confirmation dialog with Yes/No buttons' and 'displays a message to the user and asks for confirmation.' Distinct from siblings like get_user_input or show_info_message by focusing on binary approval.

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?

Explicitly says 'Perfect for getting approval before proceeding with an action,' providing clear when-to-use context. Does not explicitly exclude alternatives, but the purpose is well-defined.

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

Deploy Server

Other Tools