Skip to main content
Glama
OpenZeppelin

OpenZeppelin Contracts MCP Server

Official
by OpenZeppelin

Cairo ERC1155

cairo-erc1155

Generates ERC-1155 token contract source with configurable access, mint, burn, pause, royalty, and URI features. Returns formatted Markdown code without writing to disk.

Instructions

Make a non-fungible token per the ERC-1155 standard.

Returns the source code of the generated contract, formatted in a Markdown code block. Does not write to disk.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
infoNoMetadata about the contract and author
nameYesThe name of the contract
accessNo
macrosNoThe macros to use for the contract.
supplyNoWhether to keep track of total supply of tokens.
baseUriYesThe location of the metadata for the token. Clients will replace any instance of {id} in this string with the tokenId.
burnableNoWhether token holders will be able to destroy their tokens
mintableNoWhether privileged accounts will be able to create more supply or emit more tokens
pausableNoWhether privileged accounts will be able to pause specifically marked functionality. Useful for emergency response.
uriStorageNoAllows updating token URIs for individual token IDs.
royaltyInfoNoProvides information for how much royalty is owed and to whom, based on a sale price. Follows ERC-2981 standard.
upgradeableNoWhether the smart contract is upgradeable.
updatableUriNoWhether privileged accounts will be able to set a new URI for all token types.
Install Server

TDQS

B3.2/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

With no annotations, the description must carry behavioral disclosure. It states the tool returns Markdown-formatted source code and does not write to disk, which are important side-effect facts. However, it doesn't disclose other behaviors like network calls, compilation, or whether it's purely deterministic. For a code-generation tool, the disclosed behavior is adequate but not exhaustive.

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

Conciseness5/5

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

The description is extremely concise: two short sentences with no filler. It front-loads the core purpose and then states the two most operationally relevant behaviors (output format and no disk write). Every word earns its place.

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?

Despite having 13 parameters, nested objects, and no output schema, the description is minimal. It does not explain how to choose this tool over near-identical siblings (e.g., solidity-erc1155 or cairo-erc721), nor does it hint at what a successful response contains beyond a code block. The schema covers parameter details, but the description lacks usage context and integration guidance, making it insufficient for a tool with this complexity.

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 92%, so the schema documents most parameters. The description adds no parameter-specific meaning beyond what the schema already provides. It does not explain how the numerous boolean flags interact or what the nested objects control, but the high coverage makes the schema the primary source. Baseline 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 it creates an ERC-1155 non-fungible token and returns source code. The verb 'Make' is specific, and the resource (ERC-1155 standard) is clear. It distinguishes from ERC-20/ERC-721 siblings, though it doesn't explicitly say this is for Cairo (relying on the tool name).

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

Usage Guidelines2/5

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

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives like solidity-erc1155 or cairo-erc721. There is no mention of context, prerequisites, or exclusions. The description does not help an agent decide between this and sibling code generators.

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

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/OpenZeppelin/contracts-wizard'

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