call-a-human-mcp
Provides native macOS system dialogs for AI agents to request human approval or ask questions.
Allows AI agents to send messages to Slack channels with interactive buttons for approval or text input for questions, enabling human-in-the-loop workflows.
Allows AI agents to send messages to Telegram with reply or button interactions for human approval or questions.
Click on "Deploy Server".
Wait a few minutes for the server to deploy. Once ready, it will show a "Started" state.
In the chat, type
@followed by the MCP server name and your instructions, e.g., "@call-a-human-mcpask human for approval before dropping the users table"
That's it! The server will respond to your query, and you can continue using it as needed.
Here is a step-by-step guide with screenshots.
call-a-human-mcp
Your AI agent is about to delete the production database. Do you want it to just go ahead?
call-a-human-mcp is an MCP server that gives any AI agent a pause button — it can ask you a question or request your approval before taking action, and it won't proceed until you respond.
Claude: request_approval("Drop table users_backup — 2.1GB, irreversible")
Slack: ⚠️ AI Agent requesting approval
Action: Drop table users_backup — 2.1GB, irreversible
[Approve] [Deny]
← you click Deny
Claude: "Understood, skipping the deletion."Works with Claude Desktop, Cursor, Windsurf, and any MCP-compatible agent. Notifications via Slack, Telegram, or macOS system dialogs.
Two tools:
Tool | When to use | Returns |
| Need information only a human can provide |
|
| Before any irreversible action |
|
The tool call blocks until you respond (or the timeout expires).
More: Use cases · Slack permissions · Troubleshooting · Discord
5-minute quick start
Pick the path that matches your setup:
Channel | Best for | Tested |
macOS, no accounts needed | ✅ Tested | |
Teams, Approve/Deny buttons | ✅ Tested | |
Personal use, phone notifications | ⚠️ Lightly tested |
Related MCP server: Kontrol Freek
Option A: CLI (macOS dialogs)
No Slack or Telegram account needed. Works with Claude Desktop on macOS via native system dialogs.
1. Clone and install:
git clone https://github.com/nishantmodak/call-a-human-mcp
cd call-a-human-mcp
uv sync2. Verify it works:
CALL_HUMAN_CHANNEL=cli uv run call-a-human-mcp --checkExpected output:
Checking cli channel...
CLI channel: OK (no credentials needed)3. Add to Claude Desktop (~/Library/Application Support/Claude/claude_desktop_config.json):
{
"mcpServers": {
"call-a-human": {
"command": "/Users/yourname/.local/bin/uv",
"args": ["--directory", "/path/to/call-a-human-mcp", "run", "call-a-human-mcp"],
"env": {
"CALL_HUMAN_CHANNEL": "cli"
}
}
}
}Use the full path to
uv, not justuv. Claude Desktop launches with a restricted PATH that won't finduvin~/.local/bin. Runwhich uvto get your full path.
4. Restart Claude Desktop (quit fully — Cmd+Q — then reopen).
What you'll see:
When Claude calls ask_human, a native macOS dialog appears:
┌─────────────────────────────────────────────────────┐
│ Claude is asking: │
│ Which database environment should I target? │
│ │
│ [ Reply here... ] │
│ [Cancel] [OK] │
└─────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘When Claude calls request_approval, a dialog with Approve/Deny options appears. Claude blocks until you respond.
On Linux/Windows or CI? No interactive fallback exists without a terminal. Use Telegram or Slack instead.
Option B: Telegram
⚠️ Not extensively tested. The implementation follows the Telegram Bot API spec and basic flows work, but edge cases may exist. Feedback welcome.
Best for personal use — instant phone notifications, buttons work in the Telegram app.
1. Create a bot:
Message @BotFather →
/newbot→ follow prompts → copy the token
2. Find your chat ID:
Send any message to your new bot, then run:
curl "https://api.telegram.org/bot<TOKEN>/getUpdates" | python3 -m json.tool | grep '"id"' | head -1The number is your chat ID (negative for groups, e.g. -100123456789).
3. Verify credentials:
CALL_HUMAN_CHANNEL=telegram \
TELEGRAM_BOT_TOKEN=<token> \
TELEGRAM_CHAT_ID=<chat_id> \
uv run call-a-human-mcp --checkExpected output:
Checking telegram channel...
Bot token: OK (bot: @your_bot_username)
Test message: OK (chat_id: -100123456789)
Telegram check passed. call-a-human-mcp is ready to use.A test message also appears in your Telegram chat. If it doesn't, recheck the token and chat ID.
4. Add to Claude Desktop:
{
"mcpServers": {
"call-a-human": {
"command": "/Users/yourname/.local/bin/uv",
"args": ["--directory", "/path/to/call-a-human-mcp", "run", "call-a-human-mcp"],
"env": {
"CALL_HUMAN_CHANNEL": "telegram",
"TELEGRAM_BOT_TOKEN": "123456:ABC-your-token",
"TELEGRAM_CHAT_ID": "-100123456789"
}
}
}
}5. Restart Claude Desktop (Cmd+Q → reopen).
What you'll see:
When Claude calls ask_human, a message appears in your Telegram chat:
🤔 Claude is asking:
Which database environment should I target?
Context: Running migration job started at 14:32.
Reply to this message with your answer.Reply directly to the message. Claude receives your reply and continues.
When Claude calls request_approval, you get Approve/Deny buttons:
⚠️ Approval requested:
Deploy api-service v2.4.1 to production
Details: Replaces v2.3.8. 12 pods will restart.
[ ✅ Approve ] [ ❌ Deny ]Tap a button — Claude immediately receives the result.
Option C: Slack
Best for teams — Approve/Deny buttons, messages stay in your team's channel.
Full permissions reference: docs/slack-permissions.md
1. Create a Slack app:
Go to api.slack.com/apps → Create New App → From scratch
Name it (e.g.
call-a-human) and pick your workspace → Create App
Enable Socket Mode:
Sidebar → Socket Mode → toggle on
Generate an App-Level Token with scope
connections:write→ copy asSLACK_APP_TOKEN(xapp-…)
Add bot scopes:
Sidebar → OAuth & Permissions → Bot Token Scopes → Add:
chat:write,channels:history(addgroups:historyfor private channels)
Enable Events:
Sidebar → Event Subscriptions → toggle on → Subscribe to bot events → Add
message.channels(and/ormessage.groups)
Enable Interactivity:
Sidebar → Interactivity & Shortcuts → toggle on → Save
Install and get tokens:
Sidebar → Install App → Install to Workspace → Allow
Copy the Bot User OAuth Token as
SLACK_BOT_TOKEN(xoxb-…)
Find your channel ID:
Right-click the channel in Slack → Copy link → the last segment is the ID (e.g.
C1234567890)Invite the bot: type
/invite @call-a-humanin the channel
2. Verify credentials:
CALL_HUMAN_CHANNEL=slack \
SLACK_BOT_TOKEN=xoxb-... \
SLACK_APP_TOKEN=xapp-... \
SLACK_CHANNEL_ID=C... \
uv run call-a-human-mcp --checkExpected output:
Checking slack channel...
Bot token: OK (bot: @call-a-human, workspace: YourWorkspace)
App token: OK (format looks correct)
Test message: OK (channel: C1234567890, ts: 1234567890.123456)
Socket Mode: OK (WebSocket connection established)
Slack check passed. call-a-human-mcp is ready to use.All four checks must pass. If Socket Mode fails, ensure it is enabled in your Slack app and the app token is correct.
3. Add to Claude Desktop:
{
"mcpServers": {
"call-a-human": {
"command": "/Users/yourname/.local/bin/uv",
"args": ["--directory", "/path/to/call-a-human-mcp", "run", "call-a-human-mcp"],
"env": {
"CALL_HUMAN_CHANNEL": "slack",
"SLACK_BOT_TOKEN": "xoxb-your-bot-token",
"SLACK_APP_TOKEN": "xapp-your-app-token",
"SLACK_CHANNEL_ID": "C1234567890"
}
}
}
}4. Restart Claude Desktop (Cmd+Q → reopen).
What you'll see:
When Claude calls ask_human, a message appears in your Slack channel:
🤔 Claude is asking:
Which database environment should I target?
Context: Running migration job started at 14:32.
Reply in this thread ↓Reply in the thread — Claude receives your text reply and continues.
When Claude calls request_approval, you get interactive buttons:
⚠️ Approval requested
Action: Deploy api-service v2.4.1 to production
Details: Replaces v2.3.8. 12 pods will restart.
[✅ Approve] [❌ Deny]Click a button — Claude immediately receives the result and the message updates to show your decision.
Other MCP clients
Cursor
Add to ~/.cursor/mcp.json:
{
"mcpServers": {
"call-a-human": {
"command": "uv",
"args": ["--directory", "/path/to/call-a-human-mcp", "run", "call-a-human-mcp"],
"env": {
"CALL_HUMAN_CHANNEL": "telegram",
"TELEGRAM_BOT_TOKEN": "...",
"TELEGRAM_CHAT_ID": "..."
}
}
}
}Or connect to a running SSE server:
{
"mcpServers": {
"call-a-human": {
"url": "http://localhost:8000/sse"
}
}
}Windsurf
Add to ~/.codeium/windsurf/mcp_config.json:
{
"mcpServers": {
"call-a-human": {
"serverUrl": "http://localhost:8000/sse"
}
}
}Start the SSE server first:
CALL_HUMAN_CHANNEL=slack ... call-a-human-mcp --transport sse --host 0.0.0.0 --port 8000Running as a persistent SSE server
Security note: The SSE transport has no built-in authentication. Protect it with a reverse proxy (nginx, Caddy) or firewall rules — anyone who can reach the port can send messages to your Slack/Telegram channel.
For self-hosted deployments or clients that connect over HTTP:
export CALL_HUMAN_CHANNEL=slack
export SLACK_BOT_TOKEN=xoxb-...
export SLACK_APP_TOKEN=xapp-...
export SLACK_CHANNEL_ID=C...
call-a-human-mcp --transport sse --host 0.0.0.0 --port 8000Or with Docker:
cp .env.example .env # fill in your credentials
docker compose up -dAudit logs are written to ./logs/audit.jsonl on the host.
Getting Claude to call these tools automatically
The MCP server already tells Claude when to use the tools, but the most reliable way to make Claude call them proactively — without you explicitly asking — is to add a custom system prompt in your AI client.
The key principle (learned from production use): tell Claude to call the tools directly — not to ask you whether to call them. The approval happens in Slack/Telegram. Claude's job is just to trigger it.
Claude Desktop
Go to Settings → Custom Instructions and add:
You have access to request_approval and ask_human tools via the call-a-human MCP server.
Call request_approval BEFORE any irreversible action: deleting files, sending
messages, making purchases, modifying production systems, running destructive
commands. Do NOT ask "should I proceed?" — just call the tool and wait.
Only continue if you receive {"approved": true}.
Call ask_human when you are unsure about preferences, file paths, credentials,
or any ambiguous decision. Never guess — ask.This makes the behavior consistent across all conversations, without needing to remind Claude each time.
Cursor / Windsurf
Add a .cursorrules file (Cursor) or equivalent to your project:
Before any irreversible action, call the request_approval MCP tool directly —
do not ask the user whether to call it. Wait for {"approved": true} before proceeding.
When unsure about preferences or credentials, call ask_human instead of guessing.Trying tools interactively (without an AI agent)
Use the MCP Inspector to call tools directly:
CALL_HUMAN_CHANNEL=cli uv run mcp dev src/call_a_human_mcp/server.pyThe browser UI lets you call ask_human and request_approval manually and inspect the responses.
All configuration options
Variable | Required | Default | Description |
| Yes | — |
|
| No |
| Seconds to wait before auto-denying |
| No | — | Path to JSONL audit log file |
| Slack only | — | Bot OAuth token ( |
| Slack only | — | Socket Mode app token ( |
| Slack only | — | Channel to post into ( |
| Telegram only | — | Bot token from @BotFather |
| Telegram only | — | Chat/group ID to post into |
Copy .env.example to .env and fill in your values.
Audit log
Set CALL_HUMAN_AUDIT_LOG to enable append-only JSONL logging:
CALL_HUMAN_AUDIT_LOG=./logs/audit.jsonl call-a-human-mcpEach line is a JSON object:
// ask_human
{"timestamp":"2024-03-01T12:00:00.123Z","request_id":"abc123","tool":"ask_human","question":"Which env?","context":"","timed_out":false,"duration_ms":4210}
// request_approval
{"timestamp":"2024-03-01T12:05:00.456Z","request_id":"def456","tool":"request_approval","action":"delete db","details":"","approved":true,"reason":"alice","timed_out":false,"duration_ms":8700}Tail and pretty-print live:
tail -f logs/audit.jsonl | python3 -m json.toolHow it works
AI agent (Claude) call-a-human-mcp Human (Slack/Telegram/macOS)
───────────────── ──────────────── ────────────────────────────
request_approval( block on sees message with
"delete database") ──► threading.Event ──► Approve / Deny buttons
│
│ clicks Approve
▼
{"approved": true, ◄── event.set() ◄── button/dialog handler fires
"reason": "alice"}The MCP tool handler blocks on a threading.Event. A background daemon thread (Slack Socket Mode, Telegram long-poll, or macOS dialog subprocess) fires event.set() when the human responds.
Development
git clone https://github.com/nishantmodak/call-a-human-mcp
cd call-a-human-mcp
uv sync --extra dev
uv run --extra dev pytest -v
uv run --extra dev ruff check src testsExtending with a new channel
Create
src/call_a_human_mcp/channels/sms.pysubclassingChannelImplement
start(),ask(), andrequest_approval()Add
"sms"toconfig.pyvalidation with its required env varsAdd a factory branch in
server.py'screate_server()Add
--checksupport in__main__.py's_run_check()
No changes to the MCP tool definitions needed.
Troubleshooting
See docs/troubleshooting.md for solutions to common issues:
Claude Desktop "Failed to spawn process" → use full path to
uvSlack thread replies not received → private channel needs extra permissions
message.groupsnot showing in Slack event list → addgroups:readscope firstClaude doesn't call tools automatically → add a custom system prompt
Community
Questions, ideas, or just want to share how you're using it? Join the Discord.
License
Apache 2.0 — see LICENSE for details.
Available Tools
2 toolsask_humanA
Ask the human a free-form question and wait for their text reply.
Use this when you need information only a human can provide: a preference, a clarification, credentials, or a decision on an ambiguous situation. The tool blocks until the human replies or the timeout expires.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| context | No | ||
| question | Yes |
Output Schema
| Name | Required | Description |
|---|---|---|
| result | Yes |
TDQS
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Discloses that the tool blocks until a reply or timeout, which is crucial for synchronous behavior. Also mentions the free-form nature and text reply. No annotations provided, but description covers key behavioral aspects.
Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
Two sentences that are concise and front-loaded with the primary action. The second sentence provides usage guidance. No unnecessary details.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
The description covers purpose, usage, and blocking behavior, which is sufficient for a simple tool. It does not detail output format, but that is not critical for an interactive tool. Overall complete for its scope.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
The schema has two parameters: 'question' and 'context', but no descriptions are provided. The description does not explain the 'context' parameter, leaving its purpose ambiguous. The 'question' parameter is self-explanatory, but the lack of context explanation reduces clarity.
Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.
Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?
Clearly states the tool asks a free-form question and waits for a text reply. Provides examples of use cases (preference, clarification, credentials, decision), distinguishing it from approval-specific tasks. The name and description align well.
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
Explicitly states when to use the tool ('when you need information only a human can provide') with concrete examples. Does not explicitly contrast with the sibling tool 'request_approval', but the use cases are distinct. Slight room for improvement in naming the alternative.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
request_approvalA
Ask the human to approve or deny a proposed action before executing it.
Call this before any irreversible or high-stakes action (deleting data, sending messages, modifying production systems, spending money, etc.). The tool blocks until the human approves/denies or the timeout expires.
Returns {"approved": bool, "reason": str} where reason is the human's username or name if available.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| action | Yes | ||
| details | No |
TDQS
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
With no annotations, the description carries the full burden and discloses the key blocking behavior: 'The tool blocks until the human approves/denies or the timeout expires.' It also explains the return shape, though it does not mention timeout duration or any side effects of requesting approval.
Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
The description is concise and well structured: purpose, usage guidance, and return value are each given in a short, focused block. No filler or redundant wording is present.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
The return value is described despite the lack of an output schema, which is helpful. However, the missing parameter semantics and unspecified timeout leave some practical details unaddressed for an agent deciding how to call the tool with proper arguments.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
Schema coverage is 0% and the description does not explain the parameters. It mentions a 'proposed action' in prose but never maps it to the action parameter, and it leaves details completely undefined, so an agent must infer its meaning from the parameter name alone.
Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.
Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?
The description opens with a specific verb and resource: 'Ask the human to approve or deny a proposed action.' It clearly distinguishes this from the sibling ask_human tool by focusing on approval/denial rather than general questioning, and explicitly notes it should be used before executing an action.
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
It gives strong when-to-use guidance: 'Call this before any irreversible or high-stakes action' with concrete examples like deleting data, sending messages, and spending money. It does not explicitly contrast with ask_human, but the approval-specific wording makes the appropriate use case clear.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Tool Schema Changelog
Recent tool additions, removals, and schema changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
2 tool updates
v0.1.0- First observed
ask_human - First observed
request_approval
TDQS
Scored across 2 tools
The two tools have clearly distinct purposes: request_approval is a structured yes/no gate for high-stakes actions, while ask_human is an open-ended prompt for information or clarification. There is no realistic scenario where an agent would confuse which tool to call.
Both tool names follow the same verb_noun pattern with snake_case (request_approval, ask_human). The naming is short, predictable, and directly reflects each tool's action and target.
Two tools is slightly below the typical 3-15 range, but it is reasonable for a narrowly scoped human-in-the-loop server. Each tool covers a distinct and essential interaction mode, and adding more tools would likely be unnecessary.
The server's domain is human interaction, and the two primary needs—requesting approval and asking a free-form question—are both covered. There are no obvious dead ends or missing operations for the stated purpose.
Maintenance
Related MCP Connectors
MCP server connecting AI agents to 100+ apps (Gmail, Slack, Notion, GitHub) via one-click OAuth.
MCP server for AI agents to plan, verify, and deploy Cloudflare-native apps.
MCP server for building and testing AI agents with multi-model experimentation and insights.
- ZapierOAuthcom.zapier
Hosted MCP server connecting AI assistants to 9,000+ apps and 40,000+ actions via Zapier.
Related MCP Servers
- AlicenseNot gradedqualityDmaintenanceAn MCP server that enables AI agents to send notifications and request user input via Discord during long-running tasks. It allows users to remotely interact with their AI assistants and provide feedback through the Discord messaging platform.26 npm2MIT
- AlicenseAqualityDmaintenanceAn MCP server that acts as an AI assumption firewall, intercepting risky decisions, detecting contradictions, and routing human approval requests via Telegram or Slack.81MIT
- AlicenseNot gradedqualityDmaintenanceAn MCP server enabling AI agents to interact with users via Telegram, supporting message and image sending, inline quick replies, and waiting for user responses.5 npmMIT
- FlicenseNot gradedqualityBmaintenanceAn MCP server that lets an AI coding agent pause on human-only tasks, request structured input via a form, and resume with the answer, all locally without cloud dependencies.-