Skip to main content
Glama
OpenZeppelin

OpenZeppelin Contracts MCP Server

Official
by OpenZeppelin

solidity-erc721

Generate ERC-721 non-fungible token smart contract source code with configurable features like minting, burning, pausing, and upgradeability.

Instructions

Make a non-fungible token per the ERC-721 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
nameYesThe name of the contract
symbolYesThe short symbol for the token
baseUriNoA base uri for the token
enumerableNoWhether to allow on-chain enumeration of all tokens or those owned by an account. Increases gas cost of transfers.
uriStorageNoAllows updating token URIs for individual token IDs
burnableNoWhether token holders will be able to destroy their tokens
pausableNoWhether privileged accounts will be able to pause specifically marked functionality. Useful for emergency response.
mintableNoWhether privileged accounts will be able to create more supply or emit more tokens
incrementalNoWhether new tokens will be automatically assigned an incremental id
votesNoWhether to keep track of individual units for voting in on-chain governance. Voting durations can be expressed as block numbers or timestamps (defaulting to block number if not specified).
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.
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.
infoNoMetadata about the contract and author
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".
Behavior4/5

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the burden. It discloses that the tool 'Returns the source code... Does not write to disk,' indicating it is a read-only code generation action. This is good, but it could mention error behavior or authentication needs.

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?

Description is concise with two short sentences. It front-loads the main purpose and includes key details (return format, no disk write) without any fluff.

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

Completeness4/5

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

Given that there is no output schema, the description explains that the tool returns source code in a Markdown code block. It covers the main behavioral aspect (not writing to disk). Missing details like error handling or size limits are not critical for a code generation tool.

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 coverage is 100%, so baseline is 3. The description adds no additional meaning beyond 'Make a non-fungible token' and does not elaborate on parameter usage or constraints. The schema already documents parameters well.

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?

Description clearly states the tool's purpose: 'Make a non-fungible token per the ERC-721 standard.' It specifies the verb 'make', the resource 'non-fungible token', and the standard. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like solidity-erc20 (fungible) and solidity-erc1155 (multi-token).

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

Usage Guidelines4/5

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

Description implicitly guides usage by stating the ERC-721 standard, which helps the agent select this tool over others. However, it does not provide explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance or mention alternatives beyond the standard context.

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/OpenZeppelin/contracts-wizard'

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