Skip to main content
Glama
OpenZeppelin

OpenZeppelin Contracts MCP Server

Official
by OpenZeppelin

Solidity ERC20

solidity-erc20

Generates an ERC-20 fungible token contract source code in a markdown block, with configurable options for minting, burning, permits, upgradeability, and access control.

Instructions

Make a fungible token per the ERC-20 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
votesNoWhether to keep track of historical balances for voting in on-chain governance. Voting durations can be expressed as block numbers or timestamps.
accessNoThe type of access control to provision. Ownable is a simple mechanism with a single account authorized for all privileged actions. Roles is a flexible mechanism with a separate role for each privileged action. A role can have many authorized accounts. Managed enables a central contract to define a policy that allows certain callers to access certain functions.
permitNoWhether without paying gas, token holders will be able to allow third parties to transfer from their account.
symbolYesThe short symbol for the token
premintNoThe number of tokens to premint for the deployer.
burnableNoWhether token holders will be able to destroy their tokens
callbackNoWhether to include support for code execution after transfers and approvals on recipient contracts in a single transaction.
decimalsNoThe number of decimals used to represent token amounts. Defaults to 18.
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.
flashmintNoWhether to include built-in flash loans to allow lending tokens without requiring collateral as long as they're returned in the same transaction.
upgradeableNoWhether the smart contract is upgradeable. Transparent uses more complex proxy with higher overhead, requires less changes in your contract. Can also be used with beacons. UUPS uses simpler proxy with less overhead, requires including extra code in your contract. Allows flexibility for authorizing upgrades.
premintChainIdNoThe chain ID of the network on which to premint tokens.
namespacePrefixNoThe prefix for ERC-7201 namespace identifiers. It should be derived from the project name or a unique naming convention specific to the project. Used only if the contract includes storage variables and upgradeability is enabled. Default is "myProject".
crossChainBridgingNoWhether to allow authorized bridge contracts to mint and burn tokens for crosschain transfers. Options are to use custom bridges on any chain, to embed an ERC-7786 based bridge directly in the token contract, or to use the SuperchainERC20 standard with the predeployed SuperchainTokenBridge. The SuperchainERC20 feature is only available on chains in the Superchain, and requires deploying your contract to the same address on every chain in the Superchain.
crossChainLinkAllowOverrideNoWhether to allow replacing a crosschain link that has already been registered. Only used if crossChainBridging is set to "erc7786native".
Install Server

TDQS

A3.5/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the behavioral disclosure burden. It clearly states that the tool returns source code in a Markdown code block and does not write to disk, which are important side-effect details for an agent. It omits deeper information about edge cases or errors, but the core behavior is transparent.

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 two concise sentences that front-load purpose and immediately state return format and side-effect behavior. Every sentence earns its place with no filler.

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?

For a highly parameterized tool with 18 inputs and no output schema, the description is minimal but does cover the key return value and side-effect profile. It does not compensate for the absence of annotations or explain how the generator fits among sibling Solidity/Cairo/stylus tools, leaving the context incomplete.

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 rich per-parameter descriptions already carry most of the semantic weight. The tool description itself adds little about parameters beyond 'per the ERC-20 standard', so it meets the baseline but does not go further.

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 says 'Make a fungible token per the ERC-20 standard', which is a clear verb plus resource, and the title/name make the Solidity context obvious. However, it does not explicitly distinguish itself from siblings such as solidity-stablecoin, solidity-rwa, or cairo-erc20.

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?

There is no guidance about when to use this tool versus the many sibling generators. The description does not state alternatives, exclusions, or prerequisites, so an agent must infer usage from the tool name alone.

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