Skip to content

Add application_type to the Dynamic Client Registration request#1613

Open
jayaraman-venkatesan wants to merge 1 commit into
modelcontextprotocol:mainfrom
jayaraman-venkatesan:feature/sep-837-application-type
Open

Add application_type to the Dynamic Client Registration request#1613
jayaraman-venkatesan wants to merge 1 commit into
modelcontextprotocol:mainfrom
jayaraman-venkatesan:feature/sep-837-application-type

Conversation

@jayaraman-venkatesan
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

@jayaraman-venkatesan jayaraman-venkatesan commented May 29, 2026

Fixes #1545

Implements SEP-837 — adds application_type to the Dynamic Client Registration request when the C# SDK registers against an OIDC-flavored authorization server.

Summary

Without application_type, an OIDC AS applies its spec-mandated default. This PR makes the SDK supply the correct value.

What happens in the changes

When the caller does set DynamicClientRegistrationOptions.ApplicationType explicitly, the value is cross-checked against the inferred type at ClientOAuthProvider construction time. A conflict (for example "web" paired with a localhost redirect URI) throws ArgumentException synchronously, before any HTTP request is sent

What changed

src/ModelContextProtocol.Core/Authentication/

  • DynamicClientRegistrationRequest.cs — adds the application_type field on the wire DTO.
  • DynamicClientRegistrationOptions.cs — adds the ApplicationType setter so callers can opt out of inference and force a specific value.
  • ClientOAuthProvider.cs — resolution happens once, in the constructor:
    • Reads the explicit value from options.
    • Calls a private static InferApplicationType(Uri redirectUri) helper (mirrors Go sdk's inferApplicationType`).
    • Throws ArgumentException on conflict; otherwise stores the resolved value and writes it back onto options.DynamicClientRegistration.ApplicationType so callers can observe what was selected.
    • The DCR request initializer just reads the stored value at HTTP time.

tests/ModelContextProtocol.Tests/Authentication/ClientOAuthProviderApplicationTypeTests.cs (new)

  • 5 inferred-value tests — localhost, 127.0.0.1, [::1], custom scheme, https remote.
  • 2 explicit-match-preserved tests — explicit value that agrees with inference is kept.
  • 2 conflict-throws tests — exact full exception message asserted, including (Parameter 'options').

Contract changes

  • New nullable property on DynamicClientRegistrationOptions: ApplicationType { get; set; }. Backwards-compatible — existing callers default to null and now get an inferred value where they previously got nothing on the wire.
  • New throw at construction: ClientOAuthProvider (constructed via HttpClientTransport) now throws ArgumentException when an explicit ApplicationType conflicts with the redirect URI shape.
  • Mutation of caller's options: the constructor writes the resolved ApplicationType back to options.DynamicClientRegistration.ApplicationType. This is documented in the xmldoc and mirrors Go's behavior.

Test plan

  • dotnet build src/ModelContextProtocol.Core — 0 warnings, 0 errors.
  • dotnet test tests/ModelContextProtocol.Tests (net10.0) — 1969 passed, 0 failed, 5 skipped
  • New ClientOAuthProviderApplicationTypeTests — 9/9 pass, including exact-message assertion on the conflict throw.

@jayaraman-venkatesan jayaraman-venkatesan changed the title feature/sep-837-application-type: adds application_type to the Dynamic Client Registration request Add application_type to the Dynamic Client Registration request May 29, 2026
@jayaraman-venkatesan jayaraman-venkatesan force-pushed the feature/sep-837-application-type branch from 5063493 to cd9ba60 Compare May 29, 2026 21:49
@jayaraman-venkatesan
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor Author

@mikekistler - can you please help reviewing this PR

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

@mikekistler mikekistler left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Looks good! 👍

Thank you for this contribution!

@jayaraman-venkatesan
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor Author

@mikekistler
If you are good with the changes can you help merging this? I don't have write access yet to do that.

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

@jeffhandley jeffhandley left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Thanks for getting this together, @jayaraman-venkatesan.

Before we merge, SEP-837's normative language ("MCP clients MUST be prepared to handle registration failures…", "SHOULD surface a meaningful error", "MAY retry with adjusted application_type or redirect URIs") is aimed at MCP clients. As the C# SDK those clients are built on, we don't have to implement the surfacing or retry behavior ourselves, but we do need to make sure a developer using the SDK is able to do those things, and we should prove it with tests in this PR before we close out #1545.

Two test scenarios I'd like added here:

  1. DCR failure is recoverable from the consumer's perspective. When an OIDC AS rejects the DCR call (e.g. 400 invalid_redirect_uri), the failure should propagate to the SDK consumer with enough context: the HTTP status, the AS error body, and ideally the application_type / redirect_uri the SDK actually sent; so the consumer can produce a meaningful error. Please add a negative test that mocks an OIDC AS rejecting registration and asserts the thrown exception (or returned result) carries that information.
  2. A consumer can retry registration with adjusted parameters. The SDK's resolved ApplicationType is fixed in the ClientOAuthProvider constructor today, so a retry implies the consumer constructing a new provider with a different ApplicationType (or different redirect URI). Please add a test that does exactly that: first DCR attempt rejected, second attempt succeeds after swapping ApplicationType; to (a) prove the surface supports the MAY behavior and (b) catch any subtle state-carryover bugs.

One related point worth thinking about while you're in here: the synchronous ArgumentException on conflict (e.g. "web" + localhost) is a nice guardrail, but it also blocks a consumer from retrying with a combination the AS happens to require; for example, if an AS demanded "web" paired with a localhost redirect, the SDK would refuse to even attempt that registration. Probably fine to leave the behavior as-is, but worth a sentence in the xmldoc noting that consumers who need that flexibility must set ApplicationType explicitly and that the inference will not override it. Up to you.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

SEP-837: Update authorization spec to clarify client type requirements

3 participants