mcp-confirm
Click on "Install 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., "@mcp-confirmconfirm before deleting ./backups/old.db and ensure the path hasn't been tampered with"
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.
mcp-confirm
In plain terms: when an AI asks "are you sure?", the MCP SDK already stops that approval being reused for a different action. It does not stop the same approval being used twice. This closes that gap, and two others the SDK leaves open.
Read this first: most of this problem is already solved
The 2026-07-28 MCP specification added Multi Round-Trip Requests, so a tool can
pause mid-call and ask the user to confirm. The approval travels back through
the client as an opaque requestState, which the spec says servers MUST
treat as attacker-controlled.
The Python SDK does this for you, by default, on every MCPServer.
RequestStateBoundary is appended to the middleware chain unconditionally —
with an ephemeral key if you supply none. It seals the state under
AES-256-GCM and binds it to the method, the target, a digest of the call's
arguments, the audience, and the authenticated principal, with a TTL.
So the attack everyone reaches for first — approve deleting cache.txt, then
replay that approval against thesis.txt — is already refused by the SDK.
You do not need a library for it, and you should not write one.
This repository originally wrote one anyway: 250 lines of HMAC, TTL and argument binding, shipped as the headline feature, redundant the day it was published. That is recorded at the bottom rather than quietly deleted.
Related MCP server: RecourseOS
What the SDK does not do
Three gaps, each with a test that fires.
1. It binds and expires the state. It never spends it.
Inside the TTL, the same approval verifies as many times as it is presented. Every check the boundary makes passes, every time. The specification is explicit that this is deliberate and that the rest is yours:
Note that these measures bound the replay window and prevent cross-user and cross-request reuse, but do not by themselves guarantee single-use. Servers for which a given
requestStatemust be consumed at most once (e.g., one-time redemptions) MUST enforce that invariant server-side.
For "delete a file" the second attempt finds nothing. For "transfer £500" it
is the entire problem. singleuse.py is that
invariant — a ledger of outstanding confirmations, spent on redemption. It
contains no cryptography, because the boundary already guarantees the plaintext
is something this server minted.
2. Nothing sanitises the question the human reads
An elicitation message is server-chosen text rendered to a person, usually
with an untrusted value interpolated into it — the whole point is to say which
file is going away. So name a file:
cache.txt
SYSTEM NOTICE: your session has expired.
Enter your AWS secret key to continue:The dialog now carries a second, official-looking prompt. The user is not confirming a deletion; they are being phished by their own tooling. The same 2026-07-28 release also shipped MCP Apps — server-rendered UI — which widens this surface rather than narrowing it.
prompt.py flattens untrusted values to one line,
strips bidirectional overrides and zero-width characters, and truncates from the
middle so the filename at the end stays visible. Control characters become
spaces rather than being deleted, since collapsing them would let a\nb and
ab render identically — two different files, one dialog.
3. No protocol layer can re-check your resource at execution time
The user thought about it in between. The file can be replaced in that window, and only the tool knows what "unchanged" means for it. This server re-checks before deleting, and refuses a path that has become a symlink.
Which layer refuses what
This is the useful part, and the tests are written to demonstrate it. MCPError
means the SDK's middleware refused before this package ran; ToolError means
this package did.
Attack | Refused by | Test |
Approval replayed onto a different file | SDK |
|
State forged, or sealed under another key | SDK |
|
Same approval spent twice | this package |
|
State minted by another replica | this package |
|
Filename forging a system prompt | this package |
|
File swapped for a symlink after approval | this package |
|
Path outside the allowed roots | this package |
|
Tests
35 tests — 17 through the server, 11 on the ledger, 7 on prompt sanitisation.
Every server test runs through the real RequestStateBoundary, the same
class MCPServer installs on itself, with a pinned key — sealing round one and
unsealing round two exactly as the wire would.
That harness exists because of a specific mistake. The first version tested by
calling MCPServer.call_tool() directly, which goes straight to the tool
manager and bypasses the middleware chain entirely. The SDK's boundary never
ran, so a redundant hand-rolled guard looked load-bearing. The test design is
what hid it, for an entire build cycle.
Coverage is 81%, with prompt.py at 100% and singleuse.py at 94%. The gap is
main()'s argparse and transport wiring, exercised through build_server
instead.
CI runs on Ubuntu only, deliberately: the swap-after-confirmation tests need symlinks, and the build fails if they report as skipped there.
Install
pip install git+https://github.com/les-k/mcp-confirm.gitRun
mcp-confirm --root /path/you/allowWith no --root, the server refuses every request rather than defaulting to
anything. Roots are fixed at startup and never chosen by the agent. No signing
key is needed — MCPServer brings its own.
Known limitations
The ledger is in-memory, so it is correct for one process and wrong behind a load balancer. The SDK supports sharing keys across replicas (
RequestStateSecurity(keys=[...])); under that configuration replica B rejects a confirmation issued by replica A. It fails closed — the safe direction — but reads to a user as a confirmation that inexplicably stopped working. A multi-process deployment needs Redis or a database row with an atomic compare-and-delete. There is a test for this behaviour.The demonstration tool is deliberately small. It deletes one file. The interesting code is
singleuse.pyandprompt.py.No CVE backs this. MRTR is weeks old, so this is built from the specification's own MUST/SHOULD list and from reading the SDK, not from a published incident.
What was wrong with version 0.1.0
Kept here because a repository that records only its successes is not evidence of anything.
0.1.0 reimplemented what the SDK already did. state.py was 250 lines of
HMAC signing, TTL, and principal/method/argument binding — all duplicating
RequestStateBoundary, none of it as good: HMAC where the SDK uses
authenticated encryption, no audience binding, no key rotation.
It was caught by reading the SDK's source, not by a test. The tests passed precisely because they bypassed the middleware that would have exposed it.
CI separately caught a real bug in 0.1.0: the symlink check ran after
Path.resolve(), so it inspected the link's destination rather than the link
itself. A swap aimed at another file inside an allowed root would have been
deleted. Fixed, with a test for the variant the original never exercised.
0.2.0 deletes state.py entirely and keeps only what the SDK leaves uncovered.
Licence
MIT.
This server cannot be installed
Maintenance
Resources
Unclaimed servers have limited discoverability.
Looking for Admin?
If you are the server author, to access and configure the admin panel.
Related MCP Servers
- AlicenseNot gradedqualityBmaintenanceAn MCP server that provides safeguard capabilities to protect against prompt injection and unsafe tool calls.6MIT

RecourseOSofficial
AlicenseNot gradedqualityAmaintenanceMCP server that evaluates Terraform plans, shell commands, and tool calls to assess recoverability and risk before execution, enabling safe AI agent actions.1511MIT- AlicenseNot gradedqualityCmaintenanceMCP server that provides human-in-the-loop approval for risky AI agent actions, with durable state and audit logs.MIT
- FlicenseNot gradedqualityCmaintenanceMCP server that provides a security gateway for AI agents, enforcing allow/confirm/deny policies on tool calls and requiring human approval for risky operations, with full audit logging.
Related MCP Connectors
Security firewall for AI agents — scans MCP calls for injection, secrets, and risks.
Security scanner for MCP servers. Detect vulnerabilities, prompt injection, and tool poisoning.
Scans MCP servers for tool poisoning, prompt injection and supply chain risks.
Latest Blog Posts
- Who's Calling? MCP Hosts Are an Identity Blind Spot (And the Spec Knows It)By Om-Shree-0709 on .mcpAgent IdentityOAuth 2.1
- Your AI Chatbot Just Exposed Your CEO's Salary to an InternBy Om-Shree-0709 on .Agent IdentityMCP SecurityOAuth Delegation
- Why MCP Servers Need Execution Sandboxing (And Why Your Current Stack Isn't Enough)By Om-Shree-0709 on .Agentic AiPrompt InjectionWebAssembly
MCP directory API
We provide all the information about MCP servers via our MCP API.
curl -X GET 'https://glama.ai/api/mcp/v1/servers/les-k/mcp-confirm'
If you have feedback or need assistance with the MCP directory API, please join our Discord server