Feature Request: Add "Yes, and also..." option to approval prompts
Resolved 💬 3 comments Opened Jul 25, 2025 by Aron-Lomner Closed Jul 25, 2025
Summary
Add a fourth option to Claude Code's approval prompts that allows users to accept proposed changes while simultaneously providing additional instructions.
Current Behavior
When Claude Code proposes changes, users are presented with three options:
- Yes
- Yes, and don't ask again this session (shift+tab)
- No, and tell Claude what to do differently (esc)
Problem
The current binary approve/reject model doesn't match real developer workflows. Often users want to approve the proposed changes but add minor modifications or queue up the next task. Currently, this requires either:
- Rejecting good work unnecessarily: Users must select option 3 and say "implement what you just proposed, but also add X" - rejecting perfectly good changes just to add small tweaks
- Accept then interrupt: Users accept with option 1, but Claude immediately resumes execution, requiring an escape interrupt to provide additional context, which creates unnecessary context pollution from Claude working briefly in the wrong direction
Proposed Solution
Add a fourth option:
4. Yes, and also... (provide additional instructions)
This would:
- Accept and implement the current proposal
- Allow users to append additional instructions or modifications
- Queue up next steps seamlessly
- Maintain context flow without interruption
Use Cases
- "Yes, also add error handling for edge case X"
- "Yes, create this component, and then work on the unit tests next"
- "Yes, but change the function name on line 43 to be more precise"
- "Yes, fix this bug, and afterwards optimize the performance of function Y"
Benefits
- Improved UX: Matches natural developer thought processes
- Reduced friction: Eliminates awkward approve-then-interrupt workflow
- Better context: Avoids pollution from interrupted execution
- Efficiency: Streamlines iterative development sessions
Current Workaround Impact
The existing workarounds break flow state and add unnecessary friction to what should be smooth iterative development sessions.
This issue has 3 comments on GitHub. Read the full discussion on GitHub ↗