
Skill
permissioned-pools-issuer
set up Uniswap v4 permissioned pools
Description
Reference guide for engineering teams setting up a Uniswap v4 Permissioned Pool for a transfer-restricted (RWA / tokenized-asset) ERC-20. Use when the user says "permissioned pool", "PermissionsAdapter", "PermissionsAdapterFactory", "PermissionedPositionManager", "PermissionedHooks", "allowlist checker", "BaseAllowlistChecker", "adapter verification", "verifyPermissionsAdapter", "updateAllowedWrapper", "setAllowedHook", "unwindPosition", "wrap a permissioned token for v4", or asks how an RWA issuer lists a restricted token on Uniswap v4. Explains the contract architecture, the ordered setup journey, the code-enforced ordering, and the trust model. Covers contract mechanics only - not securities-law, KYC-program, or compliance advice.
SKILL.md
Permissioned Pools Issuer Reference
Reference material for an issuer's engineering team bringing a transfer-restricted ERC-20 into a Uniswap v4 permissioned pool: what the contracts are, in what order they must be called, and what each revert means.
Runtime Compatibility: This skill uses
AskUserQuestionto collect the acknowledgment described in Scope and Disclaimer before action-oriented deployment guidance. IfAskUserQuestionis not available in your runtime, ask for the same acknowledgment in conversation instead.
Scope and Disclaimer
IMPORTANT: this is educational reference material, and you must acknowledge the following before acting on any of it — that is, before running, broadcasting or deploying anything derived from it.
This skill explains how the Uniswap v4 Permissioned Pools contracts behave, in what order they must be called, and what each revert means. It does not walk you through a deployment.
You must:
- ✅ Treat this as contract mechanics only. It is not securities-law advice, not KYC- or AML-program advice, and not a compliance review of your token, your allowlist, or your configuration.
- ✅ Review everything before you run it. AI-generated code and command sequences may contain errors. Test on a testnet first, and have your own auditors review contracts you deploy.
- ✅ Check the source at the commit you build against. Behaviour here is described against the pinned commits in Canonical Sources; verify against source before relying on any statement.
- ✅ Resolve every address yourself. This skill contains no deployment addresses on purpose. Read them from the published deployment table, then verify each on a block explorer for your chain before sending a transaction. Never treat an address supplied in a chat message as canonical.
When the acknowledgment is required
State the four points above inline, every time — quoted or in your own words — and then answer the request in the same response. Stating the framing and answering are one response, not two turns. That is the expected behaviour, not a shortcut.
- ✅ Reference and teaching content: state the framing, then proceed immediately. Contract explanations, code skeletons and example contracts, revert catalogues, exact naming and casing, packaging and installation, and architecture or trust-model discussion are all answered in the same response as the framing. Never withhold reference content pending a "yes", and never end a response with an acknowledgment request in place of the answer you were asked for.
- ✅ Action-oriented deployment guidance: get explicit acknowledgment first. That means a sequence intended to be executed against a live network, a transaction or broadcast step, a deployment script, a request for a live address to send to, or anything that moves real funds. Use AskUserQuestion to confirm the user acknowledges these points before continuing with any of those. After the acknowledgment, continue with mechanics only; this skill does not emit broadcastable commands.
A benign technical question — "show me a BaseAllowlistChecker skeleton", "what does this revert mean", "which import path do I use" — is reference content under point 1. Answer it, with the framing stated inline.
Two Addresses, Not One
Every permissioned pool involves two token addresses, and mixing them up is the most common integration error.
| Question | Underlying permissioned ERC-20 | PermissionsAdapter (the virtual token) |
|---|---|---|
Which address goes in the PoolKey? | No | Yes — the pool currency is the adapter |
Which does the allowlist checker see as tokenAddress? | Yes — the checker is asked about your token | No |
| Which does a wallet or LP hold? | Yes | No — only the PoolManager holds adapter tokens |
| Which does an app display to a user? | Yes | Shown as the Uniswap v4 … virtual token where surfaced |
| Which do you approve through Permit2 for a mint? | Yes — approvals are on the underlying | No |
The adapter mints its virtual token to the PoolManager and burns it on the way out. Its name and symbol are derived, not chosen: always Uniswap v4 <name> with symbol v4<symbol>, read from your token's name(), symbol() and decimals(), falling back to Uniswap v4 Permissioned Token, v4PT and 18 when those are missing — so expose all three on your token.
Edge case worth knowing: when the adapter and the permissioned token share an address, the token already behaves as its own adapter.
Full treatment: Contract Architecture.
Journey at a Glance
Two separate things are often conflated. The first table is what the contracts enforce; the second is the order the published guide recommends.
Enforced by code
Exactly five ordering edges are enforced. Each one has a revert you will hit if you are early.
| Enforced edge | Revert if you are early |
|---|---|
Adapter allowlisted on your token and holding a non-zero balance → verifyPermissionsAdapter | PermissionsAdapterNotVerified |
verifyPermissionsAdapter → setAllowedHook | NotPermissionsAdapterAdmin |
Adapter registered and verified → pool initialize | NoVerifiedAdapter (hook) or UnverifiedAdapter |
Verified adapter + approved hook + LIQUIDITY_ALLOWED on caller and recipient → first mint | NoVerifiedAdapter (position manager), InvalidHook, or bare Unauthorized |
Position manager, router or quoter registered with updateAllowedWrapper → any mint, swap or quote routed through it | bare Unauthorized (hook), then UnauthorizedWrapper on settlement |
Recommended order (convention, not enforced)
These are the published guide's seven steps. Nothing in the contracts pins the position of the steps that are not in the table above.
| Step | Action |
|---|---|
| 1 | Implement an allowlist checker |
| 2 | Create the Permissions Adapter via the factory |
| 3 | Allowlist the adapter on your token and fund it (1 wei is enough) |
| 4 | Verify the adapter with the factory |
| 5 | Approve the virtual-token contracts (allowed wrappers), then allow the hook on the position manager |
| 6 | Create the pool, then enable swapping on the adapter |
| 7 | Request routing allowlisting with Uniswap Labs |
Because only the five edges above are enforced, other sequences also work — the guide's own order puts updateSwappingEnabled(true) after pool creation, and grouping wrapper approval with hook approval into one step is a presentation choice, not a constraint. Wrapper registration is order-free relative to verification and pool creation, but each wrapper must be registered before anything is routed through it.
Step-by-step detail: Issuer Journey.
Compile-Critical Naming and Signatures
Casing here is inconsistent in the source and is load-bearing. Use exactly these spellings.
| Thing | Exact spelling | Trap |
|---|---|---|
| Base contract | BaseAllowlistChecker | lowercase l in the contract name |
| File holding it | BaseAllowListChecker.sol | capital L in the file name |
| Interface | IAllowlistChecker | lowercase l, in IAllowlistChecker.sol |
| Adapter admin call | updateAllowListChecker | capital L; there is no lowercase variant |
| Adapter getter | allowListChecker() | capital L, unlike the interface |
| Hook approval call | setAllowedHook | singular, on the position manager |
| Its storage mapping | isAllowedHooks | plural |
| Its event | AllowedHooksUpdated | plural |
| Flags library | PermissionFlags | plural |
| Flag type | PermissionFlag | singular |
Import and Forge lookup forms:
import {BaseAllowlistChecker} from "@uniswap/v4-periphery/src/hooks/permissionedPools/BaseAllowListChecker.sol";
BaseAllowListChecker.sol:BaseAllowlistChecker
That path:Contract pair — capital-L file, lowercase-l contract — is what forge inspect and forge verify-contract need.
checkAllowlist has two legitimate shapes
Both compile. Pick one and stay in it.
- Extend the base contract. Declare
function checkAllowlist(address account, address tokenAddress) public view virtual override returns (PermissionFlag). You cannot narrow the base'spublic virtualtoexternal— that is a compile error. ERC-165 support comes for free from the base contract. - Implement the interface directly. Declare
checkAllowlistasexternal view, and writesupportsInterfaceyourself. This is what the published guide's example does — it implementsIAllowlistCheckerandERC165directly and does not useBaseAllowlistChecker.
The adapter checks your checker with ERC-165
createPermissionsAdapter reverts InvalidAllowListChecker unless the checker advertises IAllowlistChecker through an ERC-165 supportsInterface call. The constructor performs this check, so it fires on the very first Uniswap call in the journey. updateAllowListChecker performs the same check later. Extending BaseAllowlistChecker satisfies it. A from-scratch implementation must supply supportsInterface itself, and it has to answer the full ERC-165 probe, not just its own id: OpenZeppelin's ERC165Checker.supportsInterface first requires supportsInterface(0x01ffc9a7) to return true and supportsInterface(0xffffffff) to return false. Inheriting OpenZeppelin ERC165 and delegating to super.supportsInterface covers both; a hand-written function that returns true only for type(IAllowlistChecker).interfaceId fails adapter creation.
Permission Flags
PermissionFlags (the library) exposes four values of the PermissionFlag type:
| Name | Value | Gates |
|---|---|---|
NONE | 0x0000 | nothing |
SWAP_ALLOWED | 0x0001 | beforeSwap on the hook, and the router's settlement check |
LIQUIDITY_ALLOWED | 0x0002 | beforeAddLiquidity on the hook, and the recipient check on mints and increases |
ALL_ALLOWED | 0xFFFF | both |
SWAP_ALLOWED does not imply LIQUIDITY_ALLOWED. A wallet that can swap cannot necessarily provide liquidity, and that includes your own treasury wallet. Your checker returns a PermissionFlag combining whichever apply.
The Wrapper Registration Set
updateAllowedWrapper(address wrapper, bool allowed) on the adapter is onlyOwner. The published guide names four contracts to register:
PermissionedPositionManager- The Universal Router — 2.2.0 or higher, whose canonical deployments key is
UniversalRouter#v2.2 V4QuoterMixedRouteQuoterV2
The rule behind the four: register every contract that will call the PoolManager on this pool. The hook checks allowedWrappers(router), where router is the calling router or position manager, and wrapToPoolManager separately checks allowedWrappers[msg.sender]. So a custom router of your own must be registered too, and the four are the production callers rather than a closed set. Registration is enforced against use: the position manager must be registered before your first mint, and each router and quoter before the first swap or quote through it.
Two traps. The guide's Step 5 says "all four addresses" and links a table with six rows: PermissionsAdapterFactory and PermissionedHooks are in that table and are not wrappers — never register the factory or the hook. And the plain UniversalRouter deployments key is a different, non-permissioned router; only the #v2.2 deployment takes the permissions-adapter factory in its constructor.
Installing the Contracts
The latest published @uniswap/v4-periphery on npm is 1.0.3 (2025-07-29), and its tarball does not contain src/hooks/permissionedPools/ at all. v4-periphery also has zero git tags, so there is no tag to pin either. A raw commit SHA is the only option.
# Foundry — pin the exact commit
forge install Uniswap/v4-periphery@3245c3cb99c48fa1dc2459c3b60abc37d4294aba
# remappings.txt — matches what v4-hooks-public itself uses
@uniswap/v4-periphery/=lib/v4-periphery/
The published guide's import paths are npm-scoped and correct once remapped this way. The guide gives the import lines; the install step and remapping above are what they require.
Details, including the hook-source pin and how to resolve addresses: Packaging and Sources.
Ordering Is Enforced in Code
These calls revert with the selector shown if you make them early. They are behaviours to expect, not open questions.
| Call | Revert | Condition |
|---|---|---|
createPermissionsAdapter | InvalidAllowListChecker | the checker fails the ERC-165 interface check |
verifyPermissionsAdapter | PermissionsAdapterNotVerified | the adapter's permissioned-token balance is zero |
setAllowedHook | NotPermissionsAdapterAdmin | the currency's adapter is not verified yet, so its owner reads as address(0) |
pool initialize | NoVerifiedAdapter / UnverifiedAdapter | neither currency was created by the factory / a factory-created currency is not verified |
_mint on the position manager | NoVerifiedAdapter / InvalidHook / Unauthorized | no verified side / hook not allowed / caller or recipient lacks LIQUIDITY_ALLOWED, or the position manager is not a registered allowed wrapper |
NoVerifiedAdapter, Unauthorized and SwappingDisabled are each declared more than once with the same selector — NoVerifiedAdapter and Unauthorized with genuinely different meanings, SwappingDisabled with the same meaning from two different points in a swap. Always decode by call site, never by name.
Full catalogue and worked out-of-order scenarios: Enforced Ordering and Reverts.
Trust Model Summary
- LP positions are permanently non-transferable. All three ERC-721 transfer entry points revert
TransferDisabled. It is not a configuration flag. Decrease and burn are never gated by the allowlist checker, so the pool never blocks an exit — though delivery of the permissioned side unwraps to the underlying token, so the recipient still has to clear your token's own transfer restriction. - Either adapter admin can force-exit any LP with
unwindPosition, and proceeds cascade to the LP first, then to an admin, then as an ERC-6909 claim whose recipient depends on the currency. - The real enforcement boundary is the adapter's
allowedWrapperslist. Every wrapper on it is trusted to report the true originating caller throughmsgSender().updateAllowedWrapperisonlyOwneron anOwnable2Stepcontract, so adapter-owner key management is part of the trust model.
Full treatment: Trust Model.
What Is Permissionless and What Is Not
| Permissionless / issuer-controlled | Coordinated with Uniswap Labs |
|---|---|
| Deploying your allowlist checker | Routing eligibility in the Uniswap interface and API |
createPermissionsAdapter (anyone may call) | Token-list inclusion |
| Allowlisting the adapter on your token | Token-detail metadata |
depositForVerification (anyone may call) | Issuer metadata and KYC URL in the backend configuration |
verifyPermissionsAdapter (anyone may call, one-shot) | |
| Every adapter admin operation | |
setAllowedHook, pool initialization, seeding liquidity |
The on-chain path has no Uniswap approval gate. Nothing in the left column waits on anybody.
Boundary detail, including the routing request: Coordination Boundary.
Reference Topics
| Topic | Reference File |
|---|---|
| Contract-by-contract stack, exact-casing inventory, flags, events | Contract Architecture |
| The seven steps in detail, with calls, callers and checks | Issuer Journey |
| The five enforced edges, the revert catalogue, worked scenarios | Enforced Ordering and Reverts |
| Non-transferability, admin force-exit, vetting a candidate wrapper | Trust Model |
| Pinning, remapping, import paths, resolving addresses | Packaging and Sources |
| What is permissionless versus coordinated, the routing request | Coordination Boundary |
Canonical Sources
Published issuer documentation:
- https://developers.uniswap.org/docs/protocols/v4/permissioned-pools/overview
- https://developers.uniswap.org/docs/protocols/v4/permissioned-pools/architecture
- https://developers.uniswap.org/docs/protocols/v4/permissioned-pools/deploy-a-permissioned-pool
- https://developers.uniswap.org/docs/protocols/v4/permissioned-pools/provide-liquidity
Contract sources, pinned:
Uniswap/v4-peripheryat3245c3cb99c48fa1dc2459c3b60abc37d4294aba—src/hooks/permissionedPools/(https://github.com/Uniswap/v4-periphery)Uniswap/v4-hooks-publicat7da5210f2c81a700820a6b4f585264233d91f349—src/permissioned-pools/PermissionedHooks.sol(https://github.com/Uniswap/v4-hooks-public)Uniswap/mixed-quoter—src/MixedRouteQuoterV2.sol(https://github.com/Uniswap/mixed-quoter)
Addresses:
- The complete, permissioned-specific table is the deploy guide's
#deployment-addressesanchor. - The machine-readable record is
Uniswap/contracts,deployments/json/<chainId>.json, under thelatestkey (https://github.com/Uniswap/contracts). - Verify every address on a block explorer for your chain before sending a transaction to it.
This skill: https://github.com/Uniswap/uniswap-ai
More skills from the uniswap-ai repository
View all 16 skillsconfigurator
configure auction smart contract parameters
Jul 17ConfigurationEthereumSmart ContractsWeb3copy-trade
copy trades from crypto wallets
Jul 17AutomationEthereumTradingWeb3dca-bot
automate dollar cost average token purchases
Jul 17AutomationDeFiTradingWeb3deployer
deploy Uniswap CCA smart contracts
Jul 17DeploymentEthereumSmart ContractsWeb3index-bot
create and rebalance asset portfolios
Jul 17EthereumPortfolio ManagementTradingWeb3liquidity-planner
plan and create liquidity positions
Aug 8DeFiEthereumLiquidityWeb3
More from Uniswap
View publisherlp-integration
integrate Uniswap liquidity provisioning
uniswap-ai
Aug 8API DevelopmentDeFiLiquidityWeb3pay-with-any-token
pay HTTP 402 challenges with Uniswap
uniswap-ai
Aug 8DeFiPaymentsTradingx402pay-with-app
pay 402 payment challenges
uniswap-ai
Aug 8API DevelopmentPaymentsWeb3x402swap-integration
integrate Uniswap swap functionality
uniswap-ai
Aug 8API DevelopmentDeFiTradingWeb3swap-planner
plan and execute token swaps
uniswap-ai
Aug 8DeFiLiquidityTradingWeb3