From a person’s instruction to the shared project record
The workflow begins in the agent’s own environment. A person asks it to continue some work, and the agent uses its Scoped MCP connection to find the relevant project or issue. It can read the current state before deciding what to return.
- 1. Find
- The client searches for the project, issue, or relationship relevant to the request.
- 2. Read
- The agent retrieves current fields, discussion, and connected work within its grant.
- 3. Update
- The client submits a permitted change, such as an issue update or a new comment.
- 4. Review
- The accepted change appears in the same project record the team already uses.
Scoped checks authority before accepting a write
A request does not become trusted simply because it came through MCP. Scoped verifies the connection, selected workspace, authorizing person’s current membership, requested resource, and scopes required for the action. A read-only connection cannot acquire write access by asking for it in a prompt.
The same project rules still apply after authorization. MCP is another way to work with Scoped, not a route around workspace boundaries. The agent-first project management and MCP guide describes the connection model in more detail.
Example: return a handoff note to an issue
Suppose a person asks an agent to prepare the handoff for issue SCP-148. The following is an illustrative authorized MCP update, not an autonomous run performed by Scoped:
- Person’s request
- Review the current handoff work and record what remains open.
- Scoped read
- The client uses
search_workandget_resume_contextto find SCP-148 and read its current project state. - Scoped write
- With issue write access, the client uses
add_issue_commentto add: “Handoff draft is ready. Supplier and carrier delivery dates still need confirmation.” - Shared record
- The comment joins SCP-148 and MCP activity keeps the authorizing person and connection source for later review.
Without the required issue write scope, current membership, and workspace-bound grant, Scoped rejects the write. The agent’s other actions remain governed by its external environment.
The activity records who authorized the connection
Agent changes are recorded with the authorizing person and connection source. That gives teammates more context than an anonymous edit: they can distinguish work returned through an MCP connection from work entered directly in the web or desktop app.
Attribution describes the route and authority behind the change. It does not claim that the person manually typed every word, and it does not turn the external agent into a human workspace member.
An accepted update is reviewable, not automatically correct
Once accepted, issue fields or a comment become part of the current shared state. Teammates can read the result alongside other project activity and continue from there. The record makes the handoff visible; it does not guarantee that an agent’s summary, judgment, or proposed next step is accurate.
The team can confirm the example’s two dates, correct the comment if needed, and decide what happens next. Scoped records the project work; people remain responsible for reviewing consequential changes.
Keep the connection as narrow as the work
Choose the workspace and available permissions when connecting a client, and revoke the grant when it should no longer have access. Revocation blocks future use of that connection but does not silently remove changes already made to shared work.
Scoped does not schedule, prompt, or supervise the external agent. Read what Scoped does not do, choose a supported MCP client setup guide, or return to the illustrative agent workflow.
Questions about agent updates
The answers below separate permission, attribution, and review so that a recorded update is not mistaken for autonomous execution.
What does an authorized MCP update look like?+
For example, an agent can find a handoff issue, read its current status, and add a comment that the draft is ready while two delivery dates remain open. Scoped accepts the comment only when the connection has issue write access in that workspace.
Who is named on an update submitted by an agent?+
Scoped records the person who authorized the connection as the actor and keeps the connection source with MCP activity. The external agent does not become a separate human workspace member.
Can a read-only connection add a comment?+
No. A client sees and can call only the tools allowed by its granted scopes, and Scoped checks the required scope again when a request arrives. A prompt cannot promote a read-only grant into write access.
Does attribution mean an agent update is correct?+
No. Attribution makes the route and authority behind a change reviewable. Teammates still need to check important facts, judgments, and downstream results in the systems where the work occurred.