Adults deliver mixed messages to children about the acceptability of truth- and lie-telling across contexts. To probe this discrepancy, we investigated how adults evaluate children's truths and lies across various situations. Participants watched videos of children telling prosocial lies or hurtful truths that varied in their directness (blunt or subtle) and whether they were polite in nature or protective. They then provided impressions of each child and indicated whether they would reward or punish them. Results revealed a veracity by directness interaction, as blunt truth-tellers were judged most negatively when compared to liars and subtle truth-tellers, but only for polite lies. For protective scenarios, directness was not as influential. Further, participants said they would reward subtle truth-telling most. Results painted a complex picture of how children's prosocial lies are perceived and likely socialized, highlighting the importance of circumstances and manner in which lies and truths are delivered.