Skip to main content
Glama

prepareERC20Approval

Generate transaction data for approving ERC20 token spending by another address, enabling secure token transfers on Ethereum networks.

Instructions

Prepare an ERC20 token approval transaction for signing. Returns transaction data that can be signed and broadcast.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
contractAddressYesThe address of the ERC20 token contract
tokenAddressNoDEPRECATED: Use contractAddress instead. The address of the ERC20 token contract
spenderAddressYesThe Ethereum address to approve for spending tokens
amountYesThe amount of tokens to transfer (can be decimal, e.g. '1.5')
fromAddressYesThe Ethereum address that owns the tokens
providerNoOptional. Either a network name or custom RPC URL. Use getAllNetworks to see available networks and their details, or getNetwork to get info about a specific network. You can use any network name returned by these tools as a provider value.
chainIdNoOptional. The chain ID to use. If provided with a named network and they don't match, the RPC's chain ID will be used.
gasLimitNo
gasPriceNo
maxFeePerGasNo
maxPriorityFeePerGasNo

Implementation Reference

  • MCP tool registration and handler implementation for 'prepareERC20Approval'. This includes the input schema validation (inline Zod schema), the execution logic that maps parameters, fetches token info, prepares the unsigned transaction via ethersService, and formats the response with JSON transaction data for signing.
        "prepareERC20Approval",
        "Prepare an ERC20 token approval transaction for signing. Returns transaction data that can be signed and broadcast.",
        {
          contractAddress: contractAddressSchema,
          tokenAddress: tokenAddressSchema.optional(),  // Deprecated
          spenderAddress: z.string().describe(
            "The Ethereum address to approve for spending tokens"
          ),
          amount: amountSchema,
          fromAddress: z.string().describe(
            "The Ethereum address that owns the tokens"
          ),
          provider: providerSchema,
          chainId: chainIdSchema,
          gasLimit: z.string().optional(),
          gasPrice: z.string().optional(),
          maxFeePerGas: z.string().optional(),
          maxPriorityFeePerGas: z.string().optional()
        },
        async (params) => {
          // Map deprecated parameters
          const mapped = mapParameters(params);
          
          try {
            const contractAddr = mapped.contractAddress || params.tokenAddress;
            if (!contractAddr) {
              throw new Error('Either contractAddress or tokenAddress must be provided');
            }
    
            // Get token info for display
            const tokenInfo = await ethersService.getERC20TokenInfo(
              contractAddr,
              mapped.provider,
              mapped.chainId
            );
            
            // Prepare gas options
            const options = {
              gasLimit: params.gasLimit,
              gasPrice: params.gasPrice,
              maxFeePerGas: params.maxFeePerGas,
              maxPriorityFeePerGas: params.maxPriorityFeePerGas
            };
            
            const txRequest = await ethersService.prepareERC20Approval(
              contractAddr,
              mapped.spenderAddress,
              mapped.amount,
              mapped.fromAddress,
              mapped.provider,
              mapped.chainId,
              options
            );
            
            return {
              content: [{ 
                type: "text", 
                text: `ERC20 Approval Transaction Prepared:
    
    Token: ${tokenInfo.name} (${tokenInfo.symbol})
    Owner: ${mapped.fromAddress}
    Spender: ${mapped.spenderAddress}
    Amount: ${mapped.amount} ${tokenInfo.symbol}
    
    Transaction Data:
    ${JSON.stringify({
      to: txRequest.to,
      data: txRequest.data,
      value: txRequest.value || "0",
      gasLimit: txRequest.gasLimit?.toString(),
      gasPrice: txRequest.gasPrice?.toString(),
      maxFeePerGas: txRequest.maxFeePerGas?.toString(),
      maxPriorityFeePerGas: txRequest.maxPriorityFeePerGas?.toString(),
      chainId: txRequest.chainId
    }, null, 2)}
    
    This transaction is ready to be signed and broadcast.`
              }]
            };
          } catch (error) {
            return {
              isError: true,
              content: [{ 
                type: "text", 
                text: `Error preparing approval transaction: ${error instanceof Error ? error.message : String(error)}`
              }]
            };
          }
        }
      );
Behavior2/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. While it states the tool prepares a transaction for signing and returns data, it doesn't cover critical aspects like whether this is a read-only operation (likely not, as it prepares a transaction), potential gas costs, error conditions, or how it interacts with the blockchain. The description is minimal and misses key behavioral traits needed for safe use.

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

Conciseness4/5

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

The description is front-loaded with the core purpose in the first sentence and adds output details in the second. It's efficient with zero wasted words, though it could be slightly more informative without losing conciseness. The structure is clear but minimal.

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 (ERC20 approval with 11 parameters), lack of annotations, and no output schema, the description is incomplete. It doesn't explain the transaction's lifecycle (e.g., that it must be signed and broadcast separately), potential side effects, or error handling. For a tool that prepares blockchain transactions, this leaves significant gaps in understanding its full context and usage.

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 64%, with 11 parameters (4 required). The description adds no parameter-specific information beyond what the schema provides (e.g., it doesn't explain the relationship between contractAddress and tokenAddress, or clarify gas parameter usage). Since schema coverage is moderate, the baseline is 3, as the description doesn't compensate for the coverage gap but doesn't detract either.

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 specific action ('prepare an ERC20 token approval transaction for signing') and resource ('ERC20 token'), distinguishing it from sibling tools like prepareERC20Transfer (which transfers tokens) or prepareERC721Approval (which handles NFTs). It explicitly mentions the output ('Returns transaction data that can be signed and broadcast'), making the purpose unambiguous.

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 implies usage context by specifying it's for ERC20 token approvals, but doesn't explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives like prepareContractTransaction or prepareTransaction. It mentions the output can be 'signed and broadcast,' suggesting a multi-step workflow, but lacks clear guidance on prerequisites or when not to use it.

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/crazyrabbitLTC/mcp-ethers-server'

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