## Tool permissions and approvals\: next steps You can now explain a permission outcome without treating every refusal as a request for a wider grant\. You can distinguish an absent tool\, an effective deny\, a declined call\, unavailable UI\, revised input\, and a later host error\. You can also explain why no prompt is not proof of either safety or a broken gate\. ### Carry the operator contract into design The next part asks how a capability should expose those boundaries\. Host approval is only one layer\. Seed Desk’s branch\-persisted authority\, Review Desk’s one\-action revision grant\, and Field Notes’ factory\-local selection have different lifetimes\. None should be silently replaced by a generic approval answer\. Continue to [Extensions inside those boundaries]()\. Read its complete examples as designs whose domain checks\, host wiring\, delivery\, and verification must agree—not as a way to bypass an operator’s policy\. The shared connection [Permission belongs to an operation\, a revision\, and a lifetime]() compares the layers without merging their grants\.