Any coding assistant will write you a token contract in a minute. None of them will hand you the list of what it can do.
There are tools that analyse contract code and tools that review it for a fee, and they are good at it. What none of them hands back as part of writing the contract is the answer to the question that should decide whether you deploy it at all.
The contract
Solidity text that compiles, does what you asked, and reads well. This is real work and it takes an expert about as long as it takes the assistant to type.
- ✓ Compiles
- ✓ Does what you typed
- ✓ Reads professionally
- ✓ Explains itself line by line
No way to check the claims. No list of who can move the money. No answer to what happens when the business changes.
The contract plus everything around it
The same code, plus the things that decide whether deploying it was a good idea. This is the part nobody charges you for and everybody pays for.
- ✓ Every promised feature proven in the built contract
- ✓ Who can move the money, named in advance
- ✓ What you can change later, and what you cannot
- ✓ Read back off the chain after you sign
Freeze a wallet, pause a sale, hand control to a colleague, prove who owns it, every time, without a developer in the room.
Nobody asks these. Everybody pays for not asking.
Each one below has cost a real business real money. None of them is a Solidity question.
Does it actually do what was promised?
You asked for a token that can be frozen if someone cheats. The assistant wrote a contract that also quietly lets you mint 100 billion more after launch, and you will not see that unless you read all 400 lines carefully.
mintrr refuses to hand you a build where a promised feature is not found in the actual compiled contract. Not a warning. It stops.
Who can move the money?
Usually the answer is "it depends on how you wired it", which means nobody knows. A partner, a deployer account, an old wallet from a test run, someone who left the company.
mintrr prints the exact list before you sign, and the wallet that pays the bill is never allowed to become the owner.
What can I change in six months?
You will need a new fee, a second currency, a way to refund a sale. The assistant wrote a beautiful contract and will cheerfully rewrite it, and the new version will not be the one anybody looked at.
mintrr tells you now which knobs exist. No knob, no lever, no pretending.
What happens the day something goes wrong?
A fraud ring appears at 2am. You need to stop the money in minutes, without a developer, without a meeting, without touching the contract that cannot be edited anyway.
mintrr gives you freeze, block, pause and daily limits, each as a preview you approve, from any device.
Who checked this, and how would I prove it?
This is the one that shows up in the wrong room. Your accountant, your bank, a partner asking how they can rely on it, a regulator asking what your controls are. "An AI wrote it" is not an answer you can put in a document.
mintrr re-checks its own claims on every single change, automatically, and shows you the proof. We say "verified" and never "audited", because an audit is a formal opinion from an outside firm and we do not issue one.
It wins, and here is where
A page that only lists the other product's weaknesses is marketing, and you should discount it entirely.
It is faster for a prototype
Testing an idea on a test network with money you do not care about is a five minute job for an assistant, and it should be. mintrr is slower and is not the right tool for scribbling on a napkin.
It is broader for one-off work
Some things should just be custom code, written once and never touched again. Forcing a template onto work that genuinely is one-off makes everyone slower.
It has no opinion about your rules
mintrr enforces a model: proven features, a named owner, a human signature. If your use case does not fit that, we would rather tell you to write it yourself than bend the rules to fit.
It will not stop you
mintrr refuses things. Sometimes that is annoying, and occasionally you need to do the thing it does not like. We would rather lose the customer than quietly let it through.
Who should bother, and who should not
Worth your time if
- ✓ Real money or real customers will touch it
- ✓ You will need to change something after launch
- ✓ Someone else will ask you to justify it
- ✓ You cannot have a developer on call at 2am
- ✓ More than one person will touch the keys
Probably not if
- · It is a test with money you will throw away
- · You will never change it and never explain it
- · It is one strange thing no template will cover
- · You want something deployed silently, no signature
- · The fastest possible prototype is the whole goal
What it costs, and what it cannot fix
Network fees plus a service fee. We will publish the figure rather than leave you to guess.
Proving the contract does what you asked is part of generating it, not an extra you can skip.
A published contract cannot be edited. Some mistakes have a recovery path and some do not, and it depends entirely on the mistake.
The asymmetry is the point. Deploying costs network fees and a small service fee, both of which you can budget. Getting a control wrong can mean the contract cannot be changed for the rest of its life, and the difference between the two is decided before you sign rather than after. That is what the checking on this page is for.
We have not published a price yet. When we do it will be on the contact page, and it will be a number rather than the phrase "rounds to nothing".
You keep the keys, we keep the honesty
You describe what you want. mintrr writes the code, proves every promise against the built contract, tells you exactly who can move the money, and hands you something to sign in your own wallet. Then it helps you look after it.
It cannot hold your funds, it cannot sign for you, and it will not pretend a feature works when it does not. That last one is the part that costs us customers and the part that is the entire reason to use it.