SAP MCP Server

3land List For Sale

3land_listForSale

Read-onlyIdempotent

List an NFT for sale on 3.Land in any SPL token. SAP MCP context: Protocol 3land; operation class write. Use for 3.Land NFT collection, minting, listing, cancellation, and purchase flows. Confirm marketplace price, seller/buyer wallet, collection, and listing state before writes. Pair marketplace actions with SAP registry metadata only when the marketplace asset is part of the agent identity or service catalog.

SAP MCP execution guidance: Intent: read/discovery workflow. Pricing: paid read-premium; estimate first, then use sap_payments_call_paid_tool when the runtime cannot replay x402 natively. Routing: hosted accountless write is blocked; do not call this as a paid hosted write and no x402 payment should be charged. Use the local sap_payments bridge or a hosted unsigned builder when user signing is required. Signer boundary: user-controlled local profile or external signer; OOBE hosted MCP remains non-custodial.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`mint`	Yes	NFT mint to list
`price`	Yes	Listing price (in specified token)
`expiry`	No	ISO 8601 listing expiry timestamp
`seller`	Yes	Solana public key (base58)
`priceMint`	No	NFT mint address (base58)

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`content`	Yes	MCP content blocks returned to the caller.
`isError`	No	True when the tool result represents an application-level error.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed1 schema field changedJul 24, 2026

addedInput schema / description

Added value: +"3land List For Sale input schema. Intent: read/discovery workflow. Pricing: paid read-premium; estimate first, then use sap_payments_call_paid_tool when the runtime cannot replay x402 natively. Routing: hosted accountless write is blocked; do not call this as a paid hosted write and no x402 payment should be charged. Use the local sap_payments bridge or a hosted unsigned builder when user signing is required. Signer boundary: user-controlled local profile or external signer; OOBE hosted MCP remains non-custodial. Use exact field names from this schema; do not guess aliases or include private key material."

First observedJul 13, 2026

TDQS

C2.9/5.0

Behavior2/5

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

There is a direct contradiction: annotations declare readOnlyHint=true, while the description labels the operation as 'write' and the tool purpose is to list for sale, which mutates state. The description does not disclose permissions, side effects, or reversal details. With no additional behavioral context beyond the contradiction, transparency is poor.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness2/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is excessively long due to repetitive SAP MCP execution guidance that is not tool-specific. The key functional content is compressed into one sentence, while the majority of text is boilerplate. This is not concise and buries the essential purpose.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness2/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

Although an output schema exists, the description fails to provide sufficient context for an agent to use this tool correctly. It lacks guidance on prerequisites (e.g., collection creation, ownership), interaction with sibling tools like 3land_mintAndList, and confirmation steps. The description is incomplete for a complex write operation.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters3/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

The input schema provides 100% coverage of parameters with descriptions. The description adds minimal value beyond the schema, only implying token types. It does not explain parameter relationships or constraints like valid ranges for price or expiry format. Baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose4/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description clearly states 'List an NFT for sale on 3.Land in any SPL token,' providing a specific verb and resource. However, the purpose is partially obscured by extensive SAP MCP boilerplate text. It distinguishes from siblings like 3land_buyNFT, but the clutter reduces clarity.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines3/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The description mentions 'Use for 3.Land NFT collection, minting, listing, cancellation, and purchase flows,' offering some context but no explicit when-not or alternatives. It advises confirming state before writes, but lacks clear direction on selecting this tool over others in the sibling list.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.

All SAP MCP Server tools Inspect

Try in Browser

One endpoint for every MCP toolRayrun runs every MCP server behind one URL and holds the credentials. Each call is decided per client, tool, and argument, then recorded.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.