Unverified50% confidenceOpinionExact time
In MCP architecture, authorization decisions should not remain solely at the authentication layer but need to be pushed down to the actual execution stage of tool calls.
1
Sources
50%
Confidence
Long-term
Relevance
9/16/2026
First Seen
Sources
Related Entities
Related Claims
UnverifiedMCP's permission model is relatively coarse-grained: once a tool is registered, the agent can invoke it, lacking a context-aware risk assessment mechanism for individual calls, built-in operation rate limiting, or mandatory human approval processes.80% similarUnverifiedIn MCP's security design, tool invocations are stipulated to require explicit user authorization, and resource access is constrained by permission boundaries.77% similarUnverifiedMCP协议本身并不携带工具的风险语义，安全判断的责任落回应用开发者手中75% similarUnverifiedMCP currently remains focused on standardizing tool discovery and invocation formats, while fine-grained permission management control has not yet been incorporated into the core protocol constraints.75% similarUnverifiedMCP centrally manages permissions and logs, allowing business code to handle authentication logic on its own.74% similar
Cite This Claim
Stable URI
https://kongchang.com/claim/926625API
curl https://kongchang.com/api/v1/knowledge/claims/926625MCP
get_claim(id=926625)