GeezerVisonThe World Wide Web, restored to 800 pixels of glory. | |||
| Home|About|Gaming cabinet|Archives|How it works|Starter sites | |||
GeezerVison is showing github.com — fix: correlate invalid JSON-RPC envelope errors with the original request id by anneheartrecord · Pull Request #2852 · modelcontextprotocol/python-sdk ConversationFixes #2848 When an incoming message is valid JSON but fails JSON-RPC envelope validation (e.g.
This PR extracts the request id best-effort from the raw parsed payload (shared helper Tests cover all three repro cases from the issue on both transports, plus the null-id fallback (unextractable id and unparseable body). Full suite,
Sorry, something went wrong. Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page. All reactions
Author
All reactions
Sorry, something went wrong. Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
anneheartrecord
force-pushed
the
fix/2848-preserve-request-id-on-invalid-body
branch
from
384b532 to
9ab7b71
Compare
…uest id When an incoming message is valid JSON but fails JSON-RPC envelope validation, the error response previously could not be correlated with the originating request: the stdio server transport dropped the message with no response at all, and the Streamable HTTP transport replied with a null id. Extract the request id best-effort from the raw parsed payload and preserve it in the error response on both transports, falling back to a null id (per the JSON-RPC 2.0 spec) when no valid id can be extracted. The stdio transport now also answers unparseable lines with a Parse error (-32700, null id), and both transports report envelope-invalid messages as Invalid Request (-32600) instead of Invalid params (-32602), matching the JSON-RPC 2.0 error code semantics.
anneheartrecord
force-pushed
the
fix/2848-preserve-request-id-on-invalid-body
branch
from
9ab7b71 to
f52691d
Compare
Author
All reactions
Sorry, something went wrong. Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
Contributor
All reactions
Sorry, something went wrong. Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
ReviewersNo reviewsUh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page. AssigneesNo one assignedLabels
missing-issue-link
ProjectsMilestoneNo milestoneDevelopmentSuccessfully merging this pull request may close these issues. Invalid JSON-RPC envelope errors are not correlated with the original request idUh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page. Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later. | |||
| You are visitor 01402520 — GeezerVison does not store the pages you look up. Best viewed with Netscape Navigator 4.7 or Internet Explorer 6 at 800×600. No cookies required. |