feat(core): add support for custom deny messages in policy rules (#17427)

docs/core/policy-engine.md

@@ -210,6 +210,10 @@ decision = "ask_user"
 # The priority of the rule, from 0 to 999.
 priority = 10
 
+# (Optional) A custom message to display when a tool call is denied by this rule.
+# This message is returned to the model and user, useful for explaining *why* it was denied.
+deny_message = "Deletion is permanent"
+
 # (Optional) An array of approval modes where this rule is active.
 modes = ["autoEdit"]
 ```
@@ -282,6 +286,7 @@ only the `mcpName`.
 mcpName = "untrusted-server"
 decision = "deny"
 priority = 500
+deny_message = "This server is not trusted by the admin."
 ```
 
 ## Default policies

packages/core/src/policy/toml-loader.test.ts

@@ -173,6 +173,22 @@ allow_redirection = true
       expect(result.errors).toHaveLength(0);
     });
 
+    it('should parse deny_message property', async () => {
+      const result = await runLoadPoliciesFromToml(`
+[[rule]]
+toolName = "rm"
+decision = "deny"
+priority = 100
+deny_message = "Deletion is permanent"
+`);
+
+      expect(result.rules).toHaveLength(1);
+      expect(result.rules[0].toolName).toBe('rm');
+      expect(result.rules[0].decision).toBe(PolicyDecision.DENY);
+      expect(result.rules[0].denyMessage).toBe('Deletion is permanent');
+      expect(result.errors).toHaveLength(0);
+    });
+
     it('should support modes property for Tier 2 and Tier 3 policies', async () => {
       await fs.writeFile(
         path.join(tempDir, 'tier2.toml'),

packages/core/src/policy/toml-loader.ts

@@ -46,6 +46,7 @@ const PolicyRuleSchema = z.object({
     }),
   modes: z.array(z.nativeEnum(ApprovalMode)).optional(),
   allow_redirection: z.boolean().optional(),
+  deny_message: z.string().optional(),
 });
 
 /**
@@ -347,6 +348,7 @@ export async function loadPoliciesFromToml(
                   modes: rule.modes,
                   allowRedirection: rule.allow_redirection,
                   source: `${tierName.charAt(0).toUpperCase() + tierName.slice(1)}: ${file}`,
+                  denyMessage: rule.deny_message,
                 };
 
                 // Compile regex pattern

packages/core/src/policy/types.ts

@@ -142,6 +142,12 @@ export interface PolicyRule {
    * e.g. "my-policies.toml", "Settings (MCP Trusted)", etc.
    */
   source?: string;
+
+  /**
+   * Optional message to display when this rule results in a DENY decision.
+   * This message will be returned to the model/user.
+   */
+  denyMessage?: string;
 }
 
 export interface SafetyCheckerRule {

packages/core/src/scheduler/policy.test.ts

@@ -36,8 +36,8 @@ describe('policy.ts', () => {
         tool: { name: 'test-tool' },
       } as ValidatingToolCall;
 
-      const decision = await checkPolicy(toolCall, mockConfig);
+      const result = await checkPolicy(toolCall, mockConfig);
-      expect(decision).toBe(PolicyDecision.ALLOW);
+      expect(result.decision).toBe(PolicyDecision.ALLOW);
       expect(mockPolicyEngine.check).toHaveBeenCalledWith(
         { name: 'test-tool', args: {} },
         undefined,
@@ -102,8 +102,8 @@ describe('policy.ts', () => {
         tool: { name: 'test-tool' },
       } as ValidatingToolCall;
 
-      const decision = await checkPolicy(toolCall, mockConfig);
+      const result = await checkPolicy(toolCall, mockConfig);
-      expect(decision).toBe(PolicyDecision.DENY);
+      expect(result.decision).toBe(PolicyDecision.DENY);
     });
 
     it('should return ASK_USER without throwing in interactive mode', async () => {
@@ -121,8 +121,8 @@ describe('policy.ts', () => {
         tool: { name: 'test-tool' },
       } as ValidatingToolCall;
 
-      const decision = await checkPolicy(toolCall, mockConfig);
+      const result = await checkPolicy(toolCall, mockConfig);
-      expect(decision).toBe(PolicyDecision.ASK_USER);
+      expect(result.decision).toBe(PolicyDecision.ASK_USER);
     });
   });
 

packages/core/src/scheduler/policy.ts

@@ -4,7 +4,11 @@
  * SPDX-License-Identifier: Apache-2.0
  */
 
-import { ApprovalMode, PolicyDecision } from '../policy/types.js';
+import {
+  ApprovalMode,
+  PolicyDecision,
+  type CheckResult,
+} from '../policy/types.js';
 import type { Config } from '../config/config.js';
 import type { MessageBus } from '../confirmation-bus/message-bus.js';
 import {
@@ -28,19 +32,25 @@ import type { ValidatingToolCall } from './types.js';
 export async function checkPolicy(
   toolCall: ValidatingToolCall,
   config: Config,
-): Promise<PolicyDecision> {
+): Promise<CheckResult> {
   const serverName =
     toolCall.tool instanceof DiscoveredMCPTool
       ? toolCall.tool.serverName
       : undefined;
 
-  const { decision } = await config
+  const result = await config
     .getPolicyEngine()
     .check(
       { name: toolCall.request.name, args: toolCall.request.args },
       serverName,
     );
 
+  const { decision } = result;
+
+  /*
+   * Return the full check result including the rule that matched.
+   * This is necessary to access metadata like custom deny messages.
+   */
   if (decision === PolicyDecision.ASK_USER) {
     if (!config.isInteractive()) {
       throw new Error(
@@ -51,7 +61,7 @@ export async function checkPolicy(
     }
   }
 
-  return decision;
+  return { decision, rule: result.rule };
 }
 
 /**

packages/core/src/scheduler/scheduler.test.ts

@@ -194,6 +194,10 @@ describe('Scheduler (Orchestrator)', () => {
 
     vi.mocked(resolveConfirmation).mockReset();
     vi.mocked(checkPolicy).mockReset();
+    vi.mocked(checkPolicy).mockResolvedValue({
+      decision: PolicyDecision.ALLOW,
+      rule: undefined,
+    });
     vi.mocked(updatePolicy).mockReset();
 
     mockExecutor = {
@@ -663,7 +667,10 @@ describe('Scheduler (Orchestrator)', () => {
     });
 
     it('should update state to error with POLICY_VIOLATION if Policy returns DENY', async () => {
-      vi.mocked(checkPolicy).mockResolvedValue(PolicyDecision.DENY);
+      vi.mocked(checkPolicy).mockResolvedValue({
+        decision: PolicyDecision.DENY,
+        rule: undefined,
+      });
 
       await scheduler.schedule(req1, signal);
 
@@ -678,6 +685,36 @@ describe('Scheduler (Orchestrator)', () => {
       expect(mockExecutor.execute).not.toHaveBeenCalled();
     });
 
+    it('should include denyMessage in error response if present', async () => {
+      vi.mocked(checkPolicy).mockResolvedValue({
+        decision: PolicyDecision.DENY,
+        rule: {
+          decision: PolicyDecision.DENY,
+          denyMessage: 'Custom denial reason',
+        },
+      });
+
+      await scheduler.schedule(req1, signal);
+
+      expect(mockStateManager.updateStatus).toHaveBeenCalledWith(
+        'call-1',
+        'error',
+        expect.objectContaining({
+          errorType: ToolErrorType.POLICY_VIOLATION,
+          responseParts: expect.arrayContaining([
+            expect.objectContaining({
+              functionResponse: expect.objectContaining({
+                response: {
+                  error:
+                    'Tool execution denied by policy. Custom denial reason',
+                },
+              }),
+            }),
+          ]),
+        }),
+      );
+    });
+
     it('should handle errors from checkPolicy (e.g. non-interactive ASK_USER)', async () => {
       const error = new Error('Not interactive');
       vi.mocked(checkPolicy).mockRejectedValue(error);
@@ -701,7 +738,10 @@ describe('Scheduler (Orchestrator)', () => {
     });
 
     it('should bypass confirmation and ProceedOnce if Policy returns ALLOW (YOLO/AllowedTools)', async () => {
-      vi.mocked(checkPolicy).mockResolvedValue(PolicyDecision.ALLOW);
+      vi.mocked(checkPolicy).mockResolvedValue({
+        decision: PolicyDecision.ALLOW,
+        rule: undefined,
+      });
 
       // Provide a mock execute to finish the loop
       mockExecutor.execute.mockResolvedValue({
@@ -754,8 +794,14 @@ describe('Scheduler (Orchestrator)', () => {
 
       // First call requires confirmation, second is auto-approved (simulating policy update)
       vi.mocked(checkPolicy)
-        .mockResolvedValueOnce(PolicyDecision.ASK_USER)
+        .mockResolvedValueOnce({
-        .mockResolvedValueOnce(PolicyDecision.ALLOW);
+          decision: PolicyDecision.ASK_USER,
+          rule: undefined,
+        })
+        .mockResolvedValueOnce({
+          decision: PolicyDecision.ALLOW,
+          rule: undefined,
+        });
 
       vi.mocked(resolveConfirmation).mockResolvedValue({
         outcome: ToolConfirmationOutcome.ProceedAlways,
@@ -777,7 +823,10 @@ describe('Scheduler (Orchestrator)', () => {
     });
 
     it('should call resolveConfirmation and updatePolicy when ASK_USER', async () => {
-      vi.mocked(checkPolicy).mockResolvedValue(PolicyDecision.ASK_USER);
+      vi.mocked(checkPolicy).mockResolvedValue({
+        decision: PolicyDecision.ASK_USER,
+        rule: undefined,
+      });
 
       const resolution = {
         outcome: ToolConfirmationOutcome.ProceedAlways,
@@ -820,7 +869,10 @@ describe('Scheduler (Orchestrator)', () => {
     });
 
     it('should cancel and NOT execute if resolveConfirmation returns Cancel', async () => {
-      vi.mocked(checkPolicy).mockResolvedValue(PolicyDecision.ASK_USER);
+      vi.mocked(checkPolicy).mockResolvedValue({
+        decision: PolicyDecision.ASK_USER,
+        rule: undefined,
+      });
 
       const resolution = {
         outcome: ToolConfirmationOutcome.Cancel,
@@ -842,7 +894,10 @@ describe('Scheduler (Orchestrator)', () => {
     });
 
     it('should mark as cancelled (not errored) when abort happens during confirmation error', async () => {
-      vi.mocked(checkPolicy).mockResolvedValue(PolicyDecision.ASK_USER);
+      vi.mocked(checkPolicy).mockResolvedValue({
+        decision: PolicyDecision.ASK_USER,
+        rule: undefined,
+      });
 
       // Simulate shouldConfirmExecute logic throwing while aborted
       vi.mocked(resolveConfirmation).mockImplementation(async () => {
@@ -865,7 +920,10 @@ describe('Scheduler (Orchestrator)', () => {
     });
 
     it('should preserve confirmation details (e.g. diff) in cancelled state', async () => {
-      vi.mocked(checkPolicy).mockResolvedValue(PolicyDecision.ASK_USER);
+      vi.mocked(checkPolicy).mockResolvedValue({
+        decision: PolicyDecision.ASK_USER,
+        rule: undefined,
+      });
 
       const confirmDetails = {
         type: 'edit' as const,

packages/core/src/scheduler/scheduler.ts

@@ -404,15 +404,16 @@ export class Scheduler {
     const callId = toolCall.request.callId;
 
     // Policy & Security
-    const decision = await checkPolicy(toolCall, this.config);
+    const { decision, rule } = await checkPolicy(toolCall, this.config);
 
     if (decision === PolicyDecision.DENY) {
+      const denyMessage = rule?.denyMessage ? ` ${rule.denyMessage}` : '';
       this.state.updateStatus(
         callId,
         'error',
         createErrorResponse(
           toolCall.request,
-          new Error('Tool execution denied by policy.'),
+          new Error(`Tool execution denied by policy.${denyMessage}`),
           ToolErrorType.POLICY_VIOLATION,
         ),
       );