Skip to main content
Glama
OOBE-PROTOCOL

SAP MCP Server

Spl-token Deploy Token

spl-token_deployToken

Deploy an SPL token with Metaplex metadata by providing owner, name, and symbol. Returns the mint address and an unsigned transaction.

Instructions

Deploy a new SPL token with Metaplex metadata. Returns the mint address and an unsigned transaction. SAP MCP context: Protocol spl-token; operation class write. Use for SPL token deploy, mint, transfer, burn, freeze, thaw, and authority management. Confirm mint, decimals, authority, recipient, and amount before writes. Use token tools alongside SAP payments and settlement tools only when token operations are part of the agent service lifecycle.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
uriNoURI to off-chain metadata JSON (image, description, etc.)
nameYesToken name (stored in Metaplex metadata)
ownerYesToken owner / mint authority wallet
symbolYesToken symbol (e.g. "MYTKN")
decimalsNoToken decimals (default: 9)
isMutableNoWhether metadata is mutable (default: true)
initialSupplyNoRaw token amount (smallest unit, no decimals)
mintAuthorityNoSolana public key (base58)
freezeAuthorityNoSolana public key (base58)
sellerFeeBasisPointsNoRoyalty fee in bps (for fungible with metadata)

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
contentYesMCP content blocks returned to the caller.
isErrorNoTrue when the tool result represents an application-level error.
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already provide readOnlyHint=false, destructiveHint=false. The description adds that it returns an unsigned transaction, implying the agent must sign and submit separately. This goes beyond the annotations, though it lacks details like idempotency or side effects.

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

Conciseness3/5

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

The description is several sentences, starting with the core action but including some redundant phrases (e.g., 'SAP MCP context'). It could be more concise by focusing on the essential purpose and return value.

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?

Given the complexity of deploying a token (10 parameters, output schema present), the description is incomplete. It does not explain prerequisites like rent-exempt balance, default handling for decimals/isMutable, or error conditions. The output schema existence reduces burden but core setup steps are missing.

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% with clear parameter descriptions. The tool description adds no extra parameter semantics beyond restating the tool's purpose. With full schema coverage, baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 deploys a new SPL token with Metaplex metadata, and returns the mint address and unsigned transaction. This specific verb-resource-action distinguishes it from sibling tools like spl-token_transfer or spl-token_mintTo.

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 lists general use cases ('deploy, mint, transfer...') but does not specify when to use this tool versus alternatives, nor does it give explicit exclusions or prerequisites. The caution 'Confirm mint, decimals... before writes' is generic and not specific to this tool.

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

Install Server

Other Tools

Latest Blog Posts

MCP directory API

We provide all the information about MCP servers via our MCP API.

curl -X GET 'https://glama.ai/api/mcp/v1/servers/OOBE-PROTOCOL/sap-mcp'

If you have feedback or need assistance with the MCP directory API, please join our Discord server