Metamask: eth_estimategas strange behaviour in Metamask

Metamask: Eth ERC-20 Token Valuation Problem

I’m running a test suite with Hardhat that uses MetaMask for web3 interactions. The problem is relatively rare, but some users have reported it. Here is a step-by-step guide to solving the problem and its causes.

Step 1: understanding the problem

When you select your contract token from the Metamask settings in the Hardhat test and then press “send” to transfer Ether (ETH), you will notice strange behavior in the console output. In particular, you may see an error message similar to this:

Error: Invalid call metadata

This can be quite annoying if it affects the functionality of your test.

Step 2: Investigation and identification of the problem

To identify the problem, follow these steps:

• Check MetaMask settings: Make sure you have selected your contract token in Metamask settings. The “send” button should be marked with the address of your contract.

• Check contract functions

  

  : Make sure your contract has at least one function that can be called using the eth_sendRawTransaction method (eg transfer()). You can test this by running your contract on the local network using npx hardhat run scripts/contract.js.

• Verify Transaction Details: Check the transaction details in the console output to make sure they match your expectations.

Step 3: Testing and debugging

For testing and debugging, follow these additional steps:

• Testing with a simple call: Call your contract’s function with eth_sendRawTransaction, passing only the token address as an argument (eg eth_sendRawTransaction('0x...')). This should start all necessary transactions.

• Add Console Logging: Add console logging to ensure that the transaction is created and sent correctly:

const tx = await yourContract.methods.transfer(0x...).send({ from: '0x...' });
console.log(tx);

• Check the console output

  : Carefully examine the console output for possible errors or warnings.

Step 4: Elimination and refactoring

If you find an error, try to fix it as follows:

• Check for typos in contract functions or transaction information.

• Make sure your contract is properly implemented and deployed online.

• Make sure your test suite does not conflict with other tests.

Usage example

To reproduce this problem, you can create a simple contract like this:

const Web3 = require('web3');
const web3 = new Web3(new Web3.providers.HttpProvider('
const MyContract = artifacts.require('MyERC20Contract');
module.exports function main() {
return new Promise((resolve, reject) => {
const contractAddress = '0x...';
web3.eth.sendTransaction({
from: '0x...', // sender's address
to: contractAddress,
value: web3.toWei(1, 'ether'),
gas: 20000,
}, (error, transactionHash) => {
if (!error && transactionHash !== null) {
console.log('Transaction completed successfully');
resolve();
} else {
console.error('Error:', error);
reject(error);
}
});
});
}

In this example, replace the placeholder `YOUR_PROJECT_ID’ with your actual Infura project ID.

Conclusion

The Metamask token valuation problem can be difficult to diagnose and solve. This guide should help you identify the problem by following these steps. However, if you’re still having trouble or need more help, please reach out to our community forum or support team for help.

Ethereum Problem Litecoind Ubuntu