modelcontextprotocol / modelcontextprotocol/python-sdk
OAuth client: authorization URL is built with a second `?` when the advertised `authorization_endpoint` already carries a query (RFC 6749 §3.1)
Nessuno ha ancora preso questa issue.
- Lingua principale
- Python
- Stelle
- 24.3k
- Fork
- 4k
- Merge medio
- 1g 1h
- PR unite (30g)
- 31
Descrizione
Initial Checks
- I confirm that I'm using the newest release of my line (verified on 2.2.0 and 1.30.0, and on
main) - I confirm that I searched for my issue in the issues before opening this one (searched for "authorization_endpoint query", "authorization_url urlencode", "second ?")
Release line
v2 (and v1 — same code)
Description
OAuthClientProvider._perform_authorization builds the browser redirect as
authorization_url = f"{auth_endpoint}?{urlencode(auth_params)}" # src/mcp/client/auth/oauth2.py:427 on main
auth_endpoint comes straight from the server's RFC 8414 metadata (authorization_endpoint). RFC 6749 §3.1 says that URI "MAY include an application/x-www-form-urlencoded formatted query component, which MUST be retained when adding additional query parameters". When it does carry one, the f-string produces a second ?:
advertised: https://auth.example.com/authorize?tenant=acme
sent: https://auth.example.com/authorize?tenant=acme?response_type=code&client_id=…&redirect_uri=…&state=…&code_challenge=…
The authorization server then receives tenant = "acme?response_type=code" and no response_type at all — a hard failure at the consent page, on every authorization, for every server whose endpoint carries a query. Servers do advertise such endpoints: a tenant/policy selector (Azure AD B2C's ?p=<policy> is the well-known one), or — how we hit it — an environment/tier tag on a multi-tenant consent app (Nevermined advertises https://nevermined.app/oauth/authorize?network=sandbox|live because one consent app fronts two authorization servers). The TypeScript SDK is unaffected: client/auth.js builds the URL with new URL(endpoint) + searchParams.set(...), which retains the existing query.
Example Code
Minimal reproduction of the URL construction (no server needed):
from urllib.parse import urlencode
auth_endpoint = "https://auth.example.com/authorize?tenant=acme" # from RFC 8414 metadata
auth_params = {"response_type": "code", "client_id": "c", "state": "s"}
print(f"{auth_endpoint}?{urlencode(auth_params)}")
# https://auth.example.com/authorize?tenant=acme?response_type=code&client_id=c&state=s
# ^ second '?' — the server sees tenant="acme?response_type=code"
Expected (RFC 6749 §3.1):
https://auth.example.com/authorize?tenant=acme&response_type=code&client_id=c&state=s
Proposed fix — merge onto the existing query instead of concatenating:
from urllib.parse import parse_qsl, urlencode, urlsplit, urlunsplit
def build_authorization_url(authorization_endpoint: str, params: dict[str, str]) -> str:
parts = urlsplit(authorization_endpoint)
query = parse_qsl(parts.query, keep_blank_values=True) + list(params.items())
return urlunsplit(parts._replace(query=urlencode(query)))
I have this change ready on a branch — https://github.com/r-marques/python-sdk/tree/fix/authorization-url-retains-endpoint-query — as a small PR (helper + two unit tests + one flow test that drives _perform_authorization with a query-bearing authorization_endpoint; uv run pytest tests/client/test_auth.py → 163 passed / 1 xfailed, ruff + pyright clean) and would be glad to open it if you'd like to take an outside PR for this — happy to defer to a maintainer fix otherwise.
Disclosure: drafted with AI assistance (Claude Code); the behaviour was verified by hand against the 1.30.0 and 2.2.0 wheels and main, and I can explain every line of the proposed change.
Python & MCP Python SDK
Python 3.14.7
mcp 2.2.0 (also reproduced on 1.30.0; the line is unchanged on main @ oauth2.py:427)
Guida per i contributori
Apri la guida per i contributori
Come iniziare
- Leggi tutta la issue e poi la guida ai contributi del progetto.
- Commenta sulla issue per dire che te ne occupi tu — evita che due persone facciano lo stesso lavoro.
- Fai un fork del repository e lavora su un branch.
- Apri una pull request che faccia riferimento al numero della issue.
Direzione di ricerca
Inizia da src/mcp/client/auth/oauth2.py:427 e ispeziona come _perform_authorization costruisce il proprio URL. Leggi tests/client/test_auth.py, esegui il relativo comando pytest e copri un authorization_endpoint che ha già una query; il lavoro è completo quando la query esistente viene mantenuta e i parametri di autorizzazione vengono aggiunti correttamente, con ruff e pyright ancora puliti.
Scritto dal modello di indicizzazione a partire dal testo della issue.
Valutazione
- Stack tecnologico
- python
- Ambito
- authentication
- Tipo di issue
- Bug
- Difficoltà
- 2/5
- Tempo stimato
- 1-3 ore
- Stato di attività
- Attiva
- Chiarezza
- Specificata chiaramente
- Idoneità per principianti
- 35/100