Sweep 19 Sep 2026 · 02:36Z Build v2.1.278 500 read Stable v2.1.267 Latest v2.1.278 Next v2.1.278 Feeds RSS JSON llms.txt Unofficial
Claude Code v2.1.269 ·

SendMessage and team mailbox internals switched to a detached 'ask' permission callback

The SendMessage tool's cross-machine and team-mailbox permission checks now go through a detached ask callback and accessor functions instead of passed-in state objects

TierUnder the hoodhow much it should matter to you
Useful1my rating, 1 to 5
Signal1worth watching, 1 to 5
AreaTeam Messagingwhat it touches
KindInternal Changesin v2.1.269,
Group of 2 Under the hood

The SendMessage tool's cross-machine and team-mailbox permission checks now go through a detached ask callback and accessor functions instead of passed-in state objects

What

  • In the SendMessage tool's bridge/Remote Control send path, the permission-check helper used to be called directly with context and canUseTool. It's now invoked with an ask callback that calls the tool's canUseTool function with { detached: true }. This affects the isolatePeerMachines approval flow (the "isolatePeerMachines is enabled: sending to ... needs your approval" prompt) and the message-post call, which now takes { tool, sessionId, message, assistantMessage } instead of also passing context and canUseTool directly.
  • The team-messaging tool's internal resolver for mailbox, live-agent, stopped-agent, and cloud-session cases now reads application state and message history through accessor functions (resolverState(), messages()) instead of a captured state snapshot. Resuming or asking permission for a stopped or cloud agent is now routed through a wrapping effect call using the same detached ask pattern, rather than passing canUseTool/toolUseContext directly.

Why

This is an internal plumbing change to how permission checks are requested for cross-machine and team messaging, replacing direct state/context passing with callbacks and accessors; it's not expected to change what approval prompts look like to a user.

How sure we are
Something disagreesSomething we can check disagrees with this entry, or the writer said they could not settle it.
The writer flagged doubtWhether this changes any behavior visible to users of team messaging, or is purely an internal refactor, isn't clear from the evidence.

See this entry in the whole of v2.1.269 →