v2: extension methods shadowed by legacy spec-method registry — custom tasks/get & tasks/cancel handlers unreachable (-32601 before handler lookup)

[czh2774]

Summary

On SDK v2 (@modelcontextprotocol/server@2.0.0 + @modelcontextprotocol/node@2.0.0), a server implementing the Tasks extension (io.modelcontextprotocol/tasks, SEP-2663) cannot serve tasks/get or tasks/cancel: requests to these methods are rejected with -32601 before custom request handlers are consulted, even when a handler is registered and the client declares the tasks extension capability.

Root cause

packages/core-internal/src/shared/protocol.ts gates incoming requests with:

if (isSpecRequestMethod(request.method) && !codec.hasRequestMethod(request.method)) {
    // → -32601 before custom handler lookup
}

isSpecRequestMethod() (packages/core-internal/src/wire/codec.ts) answers against the union of the 2025 and 2026 method registries. tasks/get and tasks/cancel are in that union — they existed in the 2025-11-25 revision as experimental core methods — but the 2026-07-28 codec does not contain them, because tasks moved out of core into the extension. Result:

• tasks/get / tasks/cancel → "spec method" (per the legacy registry) + "not in modern codec" → rejected with -32601 before the handler table is checked.
• tasks/update (a name new in the redesigned extension, absent from the legacy registry) → passes the gate, and a custom handler registered via server.server.setRequestHandler(...) works fine.

So any extension method that happens to collide with a historical core method name is unservable in a modern-era session, while brand-new names work. The asymmetry between tasks/update (works) and tasks/get/tasks/cancel (unreachable) makes this easy to verify.

Repro sketch

import { McpServer } from '@modelcontextprotocol/server';
// server advertises { extensions: { 'io.modelcontextprotocol/tasks': {} } } in server/discover

server.server.setRequestHandler('tasks/update', updateSchema, handler); // ✅ reachable
server.server.setRequestHandler('tasks/get', getSchema, handler);       // registered, but…

// client (2026-07-28 _meta envelope, tasks extension declared in clientCapabilities):
// → tasks/update: handler runs
// → tasks/get:    -32601 (handler never consulted)

Impact

The officially specified Tasks extension polling flow (tasks/get) and cooperative cancellation (tasks/cancel) cannot be implemented on SDK v2 without bypassing the SDK. We currently work around it by intercepting these two methods at the HTTP layer (routing on the Mcp-Method request header before the request reaches the SDK), which we would very much like to delete.

Possible directions

1. Scope the gate to the negotiated era's registry only — don't reject a method merely because an older revision once defined it (the modern codec's ignorance of a legacy name shouldn't outrank an explicitly registered handler).
2. Or: let explicitly registered custom handlers take precedence over the spec-method gate.
3. Or: when a server advertises an extension, admit that extension's method names into hasRequestMethod for the session.

Option 1 or 2 also future-proofs other extensions whose method names were ever part of a historical core revision.

Related: #2189 (Tasks extension tracking), #2188 (extensions framework), #2528 / #2569 (extension notifications in subscriptions/listen — the notification-side sibling of this request-side gap).

[freya0926]

Opened a fix: #2599

Root cause matches the analysis above — both the inbound and outbound era gates treat the SPEC-METHOD UNIVERSE as the union of every era's registry, so a name like tasks/get that a past revision used for a since-removed core method stays gated forever, even for an explicit-schema handler/call registered by the extension. The fix scopes the gate to the TYPED dispatch path only (setRequestHandler(method, handler) / request(method, options)) and exempts explicit-schema registrations/calls (setRequestHandler(method, schemas, handler) / request(request, resultSchema, options)), which is the extension-authoring path both directions already require task methods to use.