{"version":"2.1.323","anchor":"bridge-permission-request-suppression-check-loosened","canonical_anchor":"bridge-permission-request-suppression-check-loosened","heading":"Remote Control matches suppressed permission requests with a looser check","tier":"internal","area":"Remote Control","scope":"individual","heads_up":false,"url":"https:\/\/changelogs.core-directive.com\/v\/2.1.323\/e\/bridge-permission-request-suppression-check-loosened","release_url":"https:\/\/changelogs.core-directive.com\/v\/2.1.323","markdown":"### Remote Control matches suppressed permission requests with a looser check\n\nRemote Control no longer needs a non-empty request ID to treat a permission request as suppressed\n\n**Unclear.** It is not clear which requests are now treated as suppressed that were not before.\n\n**What**\n\nRemote Control lets you follow and steer a Claude Code session from another device, including answering permission prompts. Claude Code decides whether a permission request has been suppressed by reading details attached to it.\n\nThat check used to require a non-empty ID for the suppressed request. It now accepts the details when they can be read in another way, without that ID being present.\n\nThe switch this change is likely tied to falls back to on when the server sends nothing. The flag server returned it on for this site's account and for an anonymous check, in readings not taken under this release.\n\n**Why**\n\nThis affects how permission prompts sent through Remote Control are matched to the requests they answer.\n\n- Flag `tengu_bridge_requires_action_details`: On for this account, and not off by default (read for one account on one subscription tier against v2.1.323; this account: on, anonymous baseline: on, compiled default: on) These values were read against a different version of Claude Code, so treat them as the nearest reading available instead of one taken on this release.\n- Area: Remote Control\n- Tier: Under the hood\n- Useful: 1\/5\n- Signal: 1\/5\n- Scope: individual\n- Heads-up: no"}