Describe powers before selecting a template
Begin the token specification with an authority table. List each sensitive action, who may perform it, what limits apply, and how that authority can change. Include issuing units, restricting transfers where supported, changing configuration, and upgrading logic if the design permits it. Do not assume that a familiar token label describes these details. A buyer should receive plain-language behavior alongside technical interfaces. This table also gives designers a basis for administrative screens: every control should correspond to a real permission, not merely to a convenient button in a demonstration.
Make issuance rules explicit
Discuss the intended supply behavior before choosing minting controls. Is the supply created once, released under a schedule, or expanded through an ongoing business process? Specify who initiates an issuance, which checks apply, and what record explains the reason. Separate an operational approval process from restrictions enforced by the contract itself. If a cap is promised, the implementation review must establish what actually enforces it. Ask for examples at the boundary, including a request above the limit and a repeated request, rather than accepting only a successful mint as evidence.
Distinguish freezing, pausing, and account restrictions
Similar interface labels can hide different powers. Solana's token model has a freeze authority, while other implementations may offer a custom pause or restriction mechanism. Do not treat those mechanisms as interchangeable. Specify which accounts or operations a control affects, who can reverse it, and how customers discover the current state. Demonstrate an attempted transfer under the relevant restriction and after its removal. For product planning, the important question is the precise behavior a holder experiences—not whether a sales page lists a generic freeze feature among many other checkboxes.
Review upgrade authority independently
A proxy-based design can make contract logic replaceable, which creates a separate governance decision from who can issue tokens. Identify the actual upgrade authority and the process used to review a proposed implementation. Consider how operators and customers learn that behavior has changed, and which compatibility checks are required before deployment. If the token is intended to be non-upgradeable, verify that assumption in the delivered architecture rather than relying on a label. Keep a record of deployed addresses and versions so a later review can establish what was running at a particular time.
Treat removal of powers as an operational change
Revoking authority can be irreversible in the chosen system; for example, Solana documents permanent removal of a selected authority by setting it to None. Before any such action, verify the network, address, exact role, and functions that will no longer be available. Review the change with the people responsible for ongoing operations. Rehearse the process in a suitable test environment and retain the resulting evidence. Do not assume that removing one administrator eliminates every privileged path: remaining roles and upgrade controls must be examined on their own terms.
Accept the deployed permissions, not only the source
At handover, compare the intended authority table with the actual deployed configuration. Verify who holds each role and how rotation, lost access, and emergency decisions are handled. Request installation steps, deployment records, contract verification details, and tests for unauthorized actions. The administrative interface should make the selected network and target obvious before sensitive operations. A useful delivery review ends with a shared understanding of who can change the token today, how that may change tomorrow, and which limitations the operating team and holders need to understand before launch.