wallet_watchAsset RPC Method

The five-minute read

One action, walked through

1. Open EIP 747 and read the status line before the examples.
2. Write down the rule in one sentence. A fair version of that sentence is: This EIP standardizes a new wallet-scoped RPC method, wallet_watchAsset, to allow a client to suggest a token for the user's wallet to track.
3. Name the object that changes: RPC, MUST, NOT.
4. Ask what an old client, an old contract, or an offline counterparty does. If the document is silent, the silence is part of the design.

The argument, unpacked

What has to be true

• You are implementing EIP 747 at the status the text itself states: Final.
• The object that has to change is RPC, MUST, NOT. A neighbouring document with a similar name is not this one.
• Wallet support is not the same as consensus validity.

What happened after the paper

The source marks this final. That is a statement about the text, not a promise that every wallet or node has shipped it. Later documents can narrow, replace, or ignore this one. Cite the number you mean.

What to check before you use the idea

• What is covered by the signed bytes in wallet_watchAsset RPC Method?
• Can the same signature be replayed on another chain, account, or message?
• Which primitive does the text require: RPC, MUST, NOT?

Terms

EIP 747

The public text titled wallet_watchAsset RPC Method.

Final

The document's own label for how finished the text is. It is not a market fact.

The problem the paper names

A signature that does not commit to what the user saw can be replayed into a different spend, a different chain, or a different message.

What the design proposes

• This EIP standardizes a new wallet-scoped RPC method, wallet_watchAsset, to allow a client to suggest a token for the user's wallet to track.
• Today, one of the major uses of Ethereum wallets is to track users' assets.
• Without this EIP, each wallet either needs to pre-load a list of approved assets, or users must manually add assets to their wallet.

How the mechanism is specified

• Taken from the specification, the next constraint is: Today, one of the major uses of Ethereum wallets is to track users' assets.
• Locate RPC, MUST, NOT in EIP 747 and apply it to one transaction or call.
• Then check the failure the class of rule always has: a node that did not upgrade, a reverted call, a replayed signature, or a peer that does not speak the message.

What this page does not treat as proven

• A signature scheme is not a privacy system. It hides the signer only if the protocol says so.
• Wallet support is not the same as consensus validity.
• The source marks this final. That is a statement about the text, not a promise that every wallet or node has shipped it.

Why a venture studio still reads it

Use EIP 747 when a pitch says 'wallet_watchAsset RPC Method' without saying whether the rule is consensus, policy, or an interface. The number is the citation. The pitch is not.