Add human approval to a LangChain agent in 5 minutes

Shakir Riyaz — Sun, 16 Aug 2026 01:10:04 +0000

Add human approval to a LangChain agent in 5 minutes

Your agent can send the email. That's the whole problem.

A month ago it could only draft one. Now it has a tool that actually calls the API, and somewhere between "draft" and "send" there used to be a person reading it first. If you've given an agent a tool that does something real — sends an email, deploys code, deletes records, moves money — you've probably already felt the gap between "the agent can do this" and "I actually want it to do this unsupervised."

LangGraph gets you halfway there. Its interrupt() primitive is the right idea: pause execution, wait for a human, resume. But interrupt() gives you a pause — not a Slack message with the context in it, not a reject button with a reason field, not a record of who approved what and when. You still have to build all of that yourself, and it's the kind of infrastructure that's tedious to build right and easy to build wrong.

This post is the other half: wrapping an existing LangChain tool so it requires a real human decision — in Slack or Microsoft Teams — before it runs, in about five minutes and four lines of new code.

The tool you already have

Say you've got a tool like this — nothing special, just a BaseTool that sends an email:

from typing import Type
from pydantic import BaseModel, Field
from langchain_core.tools import BaseTool

class SendEmailInput(BaseModel):
    recipient: str = Field(description="Email recipient address")
    subject: str = Field(description="Email subject line")
    body: str = Field(description="Email body content")

class SendEmailTool(BaseTool):
    name: str = "send_email"
    description: str = "Send an email to a prospect or customer."
    args_schema: Type[BaseModel] = SendEmailInput

    def _run(self, recipient: str, subject: str, body: str) -> str:
        # your actual email-sending logic
        return f"Email sent to {recipient}"

Your agent calls this whenever it decides an email needs sending. Today, that's the whole decision — the agent decides, and it happens.

Wrapping it

pip install useagentgate langchain-agentgate

from agentgate import AgentGate
from langchain_agentgate import ApprovalRequiredTool

gate = AgentGate(api_key="ag_your_key", base_url="https://your-agentgate-instance")

gated_email_tool = ApprovalRequiredTool(
    wrapped_tool=SendEmailTool(),
    gate=gate,
    risk_tier="high",
    timeout_minutes=15,
)

That's it. gated_email_tool has the same name, the same input schema, the same output type as SendEmailTool — swap it in anywhere the original tool was going. Your agent's code doesn't change. The prompt doesn't change. The only difference shows up at runtime.

What actually happens now

When the agent decides to call send_email, instead of running immediately, it:

Posts a card to Slack (or Teams) with the action, the arguments, and the risk tier
Blocks, polling every few seconds
A human clicks Approve or Reject — reject requires a reason
If approved, SendEmailTool._run() executes exactly as before and its return value comes back to the agent, unchanged
If rejected, the agent gets back "Action 'send_email' was rejected by @sarah: wrong recipient list" instead of raising — so it can react in the conversation ("looks like that got rejected because...") instead of crashing
If nobody responds in time, it fails closed — no response is treated as no, never as yes

result = await agent_executor.ainvoke({
    "input": "email the Q4 proposal to john@acme.com"
})

Everything up to the tool call runs exactly as it did before. The pause — and the record of who decided what — is the only thing that's new.

Why wrap instead of rewrite

The alternative is building this yourself: a place to post the message, a way to identify which agent run is waiting on which click, a poller or a webhook, a rejection-reason modal, somewhere to log the decision so "why did the agent do that" has an answer three weeks later. All of that already exists behind ApprovalRequiredTool — you're not building an approval system, you're passing one existing tool through a wrapper.

It also composes. Gate the tools that matter — send_email, deploy, delete_customer_data, transfer_funds — and leave the read-only ones (search, fetch, summarize) alone. Different tools can even get different risk tiers and timeouts:

gated_delete = ApprovalRequiredTool(
    wrapped_tool=DeleteRecordsTool(),
    gate=gate,
    risk_tier="critical",
    timeout_minutes=10,
)

The other half of the picture

interrupt() is still the right call for pausing a graph mid-execution when you need to resume exact state later — that's not what this replaces. This is for the narrower, more common case: a specific tool call that shouldn't happen without a specific person saying yes, with the Slack UI, the audit trail, and the timeout handling already built.

Building with CrewAI instead? crewai-agentgate is the same wrapper for CrewAI's BaseTool — same four lines, same behavior.

Full docs and setup: useagentgate.com/docs. Free to start, no credit card.

DEV Community: Shakir Riyaz

Add human approval to a LangChain agent in 5 minutes

Add human approval to a LangChain agent in 5 minutes

The tool you already have

Wrapping it

What actually happens now

Why wrap instead of rewrite

The other half of the picture