github / github/copilot-cli

Document safe parsing for preToolUse.toolArgs when it is a JSON-encoded string

Offen Anfängerfreundlich
#3,349 0 Kommentare 0 Reaktionen 0 zugewiesene Personen Auf GitHub ansehen
area:plugins
Vorherrschende Sprache
Shell
Sterne
11.2k
Forks
1.9k
Ø Merge
14 Std. 16 Min.
Gemergte PRs (30 T.)
6

Beschreibung

## Summary

The Hooks reference documents `preToolUse.toolArgs` as `unknown`, but does not show how hook authors should safely parse it.

In actual Copilot CLI hook invocations I tested, `toolArgs` arrived as a JSON-encoded string rather than a parsed object. That may be valid under the current `unknown` contract, but it is easy for hook authors to assume object-style access and accidentally write hooks that fail to inspect tool arguments.

Because hook failures are fail-open, this is a security footgun for policy-enforcing hooks.

## Observed behavior

For `preToolUse`, the documentation shows the camelCase payload shape as:

```ts
{
sessionId: string;
timestamp: number;
cwd: string;
toolName: string;
toolArgs: unknown;
}
```

In tested CLI/App-backed hook invocations, the payload effectively behaved like:

```json
{
"toolName": "bash",
"toolArgs": "{\"command\":\"echo hello\"}"
}
```

rather than:

```json
{
"toolName": "bash",
"toolArgs": {
"command": "echo hello"
}
}
```

I am not claiming the string form is invalid. Since the schema says `unknown`, this may be intentional or implementation-defined. The problem is that the docs do not tell hook authors how to handle it safely.

## Why this matters

Security hooks commonly inspect fields like:

```bash
.toolArgs.command
.toolArgs.path
.toolArgs.url
```

If `toolArgs` is a JSON-encoded string, this kind of access does not work as expected. Depending on the script and shell settings, the hook may fail, emit invalid output, or skip the intended check.

Since hook failures are fail-open, a parsing mistake can silently bypass a security policy.

## Request

Please document the expected handling for `toolArgs` and provide safe parsing examples.

At minimum, the docs should say something like:

> `toolArgs` is `unknown` and may be a JSON-encoded string. Hook scripts should check its runtime type and parse it before inspecting tool arguments.

A Bash example would help:

```bash
INPUT="$(cat)"

TOOL_ARGS_JSON="$(
jq -c '
(.toolArgs // .tool_args // .tool_input // {}) as $args
| if ($args | type) == "string" then ($args | fromjson? // {}) else $args end
' <<< "$INPUT"
)"

COMMAND="$(jq -r '.command // ""' <<< "$TOOL_ARGS_JSON")"
```

Python example:

```python
import json
import sys

payload = json.load(sys.stdin)
tool_args = payload.get("toolArgs", payload.get("tool_input", {}))

if isinstance(tool_args, str):
try:
tool_args = json.loads(tool_args)
except json.JSONDecodeError:
tool_args = {}

if not isinstance(tool_args, dict):
tool_args = {}

command = tool_args.get("command", "")
```

## Expected improvement

This would make hook authoring safer, especially for security-focused `preToolUse` hooks, and reduce the chance of fail-open bypasses caused by incorrect assumptions about the runtime type of `toolArgs`.

Beitragsleitfaden

Beitragsleitfaden öffnen

Rechercherichtung

Start with the Hooks reference and its preToolUse payload section. Document that toolArgs may be a JSON-encoded string, then add safe Bash and Python parsing examples that handle invalid or non-object values; done means hook authors can reliably inspect fields such as command, path, or url.

Vom Indexierungsmodell aus dem Issue-Text verfasst.

Bewertung

Tech-Stack
python, shell
Bereich
documentation, security
Issue-Typ
Dokumentation
Schwierigkeit
2/5
Geschätzter Aufwand
1-3 Stunden
Aktivitätsstatus
Ruhig
Klarheit
Größtenteils klar
Anfängerfreundlichkeit
68/100

Neue Issues direkt in Ihr Postfach

Eine kurze Übersicht über anfängerfreundliche GitHub-Issues.