SAP MCP Server

3land Mint And List

3land_mintAndList

Mint an NFT on 3.Land and automatically list it for sale. 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: local-signer write 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
`name`	Yes	Name name or domain value used by 3land Mint And List.
`image`	Yes	NFT image URL
`owner`	Yes	Solana public key (base58)
`price`	Yes	Listing price in token amount
`supply`	No	Edition supply
`priceMint`	No	NFT mint address (base58)
`attributes`	No	Attributes parameter for 3land Mint And List.
`collection`	Yes	3.Land collection ID
`description`	No	Description parameter for 3land Mint And List.

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.

TDQS

A3.6/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations indicate a write operation (readOnlyHint=false). The description adds substantial behavioral context beyond annotations, detailing the local-signer write workflow, pricing (paid read-premium), routing constraints, and signer boundary. No contradictions with annotations.

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 front-loaded with a clear sentence but is followed by a verbose block of SAP MCP execution guidance that repeats similar information (local-signer, pricing, routing). This could be condensed to improve conciseness without losing essential details.

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

Completeness3/5

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

The description covers the core operation, required pre-checks, and execution constraints. However, it does not reference the output schema or explain return values, and the parameter descriptions in the schema are poor. While adequate, there are gaps in completeness.

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?

Schema description coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3. The overall description does not add significant meaning beyond the schema; parameter descriptions within the schema are generic (e.g., 'Name name or domain value'). The description implicitly groups parameters but does not enhance understanding of their roles.

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

Purpose5/5

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

The description clearly states the tool's purpose: 'Mint an NFT on 3.Land and automatically list it for sale.' This specific verb+resource combination distinguishes it from siblings like 3land_buyNFT or 3land_cancelListing.

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 provides usage context (e.g., 'Use for 3.Land NFT collection, minting, listing, cancellation, and purchase flows' and 'Confirm marketplace price...before writes') but lacks explicit guidance on when not to use this tool or clear alternatives. The guidance is implicit rather than directive.

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

RayrunBuild, deploy, and operate MCP servers without becoming an infrastructure team.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

TDQS

B3.2/5.0

Disambiguation4/5

Tools are organized by protocol prefix (e.g., adrena_, jupiter_, sap_) which helps distinguish domains. Within each protocol, tool names clearly indicate actions (e.g., openPosition, getQuote). However, with 360 tools, some cross-protocol overlaps (e.g., multiple swap tools) and many similar fetch tools in the sap_* family require careful reading of descriptions to disambiguate.

Naming Consistency4/5

Each protocol group follows a consistent naming convention (e.g., snake_case for adrena_, camelCase for 3land, sap_ prefix for SAP SDK tools). The mix of conventions across protocols is acceptable, though a uniform style would improve predictability. Minor inconsistency: hyphenated names like metaplex-nft_ vs underscores.

Tool Count2/5

360 tools is far too many for a well-scoped MCP server. This aggregates dozens of protocols and SAP-specific features, making navigation difficult. The server would benefit from being split into focused micro-servers (e.g., SAP identity, Jupiter DEX, NFT tools). The current count overwhelms the coherence of the set.

Completeness4/5

The tool set covers a vast range of Solana ecosystem activities: token operations, swaps, staking, NFT management, bridging, oracle data, identity registration, chat, escrow, subscriptions, and premium streaming. Major lifecycle operations are present, though some niche subdomains may have missing functions (e.g., detailed governance or lending management). Overall, it's comprehensive for the intended scope.

3land Mint And List

Input Schema

Output Schema

TDQS

Glama MCP Gateway

TDQS

Resources