modelcontextprotocol / modelcontextprotocol/python-sdk
coerce_request_id() folds non-canonical numeric strings, conflating wire-distinct JSON-RPC ids
Nobody has claimed this yet.
- Dominant language
- Python
- Stars
- 24.3k
- Forks
- 4k
- Avg merge
- 1d 1h
- Merged PRs (30d)
- 31
Description
Initial Checks
- I confirm that I'm using the newest release of my line (the latest 2.x, or the latest 1.x if I'm still on v1)
- I confirm that I searched for my issue in https://github.com/modelcontextprotocol/python-sdk/issues before opening this issue
Release line
2.x (current stable)
Description
On current main, coerce_request_id() in src/mcp/shared/dispatcher.py folds a stringified id to int with a bare int(request_id). That accepts a lot more than a canonical integer string, so ids that are distinct on the JSON-RPC wire collapse onto one correlation key:
coerce_request_id('007') -> 7
coerce_request_id('+7') -> 7
coerce_request_id('1_000') -> 1000
coerce_request_id(' 7 ') -> 7
coerce_request_id('٧') -> 7
This shared key backs _pending (response correlation), _in_flight (cancellation), and progress-token routing. So a peer, or a caller using CallOptions["request_id"], that uses e.g. 10 and "1_0" as two ids has them merged. A notifications/cancelled for one hits the other, and the first can't be cancelled. It's the same cross-wiring class as #3060, but between ids that are genuinely different on the wire.
JSON-RPC 2.0 treats String and Number ids as distinct value types, and the function's own intent (and its test, "7" -> 7) is the canonical "peer stringified an int" case. The forms above aren't that. They're an artifact of Python's int(). The docstring says "matches the TS SDK", but JS Number("1_000") is NaN and Number("0x10") is 16, so today's behavior matches neither.
The narrow fix is to fold only when the string equals str(int(s)), which keeps the intended "7" -> 7 and "-3" -> -3 behavior and leaves every other string a distinct id. I have a patch and a regression test for it (both dispatchers share the function) and I'm happy to open a PR once this is triaged and assigned.
Disclosure: I used an AI coding assistant to help explore the code and draft this. I verified the reproduction and understand the fix myself.
Example Code
from mcp.shared.dispatcher import coerce_request_id
for raw in ("007", "+7", "1_000", " 7 ", "٧"):
print(repr(raw), "->", repr(coerce_request_id(raw)))
# every line prints an int, so all five distinct wire ids share one key
Python & MCP Python SDK
Python 3.11.14, python-sdk main @ 5bc9e07, macOS
Contributor guide
First steps
- Read the whole issue, then the project's contributing guide.
- Comment on the issue to say you are picking it up — it saves two people doing the same work.
- Fork the repository and make your change on a branch.
- Open a pull request that references the issue number.
Research direction
Start in src/mcp/shared/dispatcher.py at coerce_request_id() and read its existing test for the intended "7" to 7 behavior. Add regression coverage for non-canonical numeric strings and verify that distinct wire ids remain distinct across pending responses, cancellation, and progress-token routing.
Written by the indexing model from the issue text.
Assessment
- Tech stack
- python
- Domain
- api, backend
- Issue type
- Bug
- Difficulty
- 2/5
- Estimated time
- 1-3 hours
- Activity status
- Active
- Clarity
- Clearly specified
- Newbie friendliness
- 84/100