fix: Prompt validation errors are logged with an unnecessary traceback (#3342) - #3412
Conversation
modelcontextprotocol#3342) When a prompt is invoked without a required argument, the request is correctly rejected — but the server logs the resulting ValueError as a full traceback at ERROR level via logger.exception(). For expected, user-facing validation failures (missing required arguments) this floods server logs with stack traces that operators have to wade through. Changes: * Add PromptArgumentError(ValueError) to mcp.server.mcpserver.exceptions — stays a ValueError subclass for backward compatibility, but lets the server distinguish known user-input failures from unexpected bugs. * In Prompt.render(), raise PromptArgumentError instead of bare ValueError. * In MCPServer.get_prompt(), add an except clause that logs PromptArgumentError at WARNING without exc_info, then re-raises the same ValueError the protocol layer expects. * Tests: - test_get_prompt_missing_args_logs_warning_no_traceback — verifies WARNING log is emitted and no ERROR/EXCEPTION log is produced for known validation errors. - test_prompt_argument_error_is_value_error_subclass — verifies backward compat: existing user code catching ValueError still catches the new exception. 22/22 prompt tests pass locally (21 pre-existing + 1 pre-existing test plus my 2 new tests). All 21 existing prompt tests still pass.
|
This PR has been closed automatically. This repo only keeps pull requests open when they come from a maintainer, or from a contributor a maintainer has assigned to the linked issue, and you aren't currently assigned to #3342. If a maintainer assigns you to #3342, this PR reopens on its own and there's nothing more you need to do here. Assignment is a maintainer call based on capacity; comments that only ask to be assigned don't factor in. What does help is engaging on the issue itself by confirming the repro, explaining why it matters for your use case, or describing the approach you'd take. You're welcome to keep pushing commits here (just avoid force-pushing, since GitHub can't reopen a rewritten branch), but that on its own won't get the PR reviewed or the issue assigned, and realistically most auto-closed PRs stay closed. There's no need to open a new PR either way. CONTRIBUTING.md has the full reasoning, but in short:
Maintainers: reopen, remove |
Summary
Closes #3342
Changes
Test plan