Which wallet outcome should the submission target?
The first record names the wallet, token, network, and requested display. This prevents a logo request from being confused with token inclusion or verification. Trust Wallet asset inclusion, Jupiter verification, and wallet tracking are separate objectives. A token visible in one interface does not establish its status in another.
We open a request with 1 named destination and 1 explicit outcome. If you have several targets, we keep a separate record for each. For every request, we identify what users should be able to see and what evidence your team can provide. That gives us a usable basis for checking the current submission route.
The review can cover:
- Trust Wallet asset details and logo materials.
- A Jupiter verification or token information request.
- The difference between a wallet list and a tracker profile.
- A visible status check after a platform response.
If you are mapping several submission needs, start with listings and verification. If the issue is an explorer record rather than wallet display, use the separate explorer token information update.
What evidence makes a wallet asset request reviewable?
The asset record is reviewable when its contract, network, name, symbol, logo, and project references agree. We compare the details your team supplies with the public sources you identify. This catches conflicting versions before a handoff.
Send the core materials in one package. Our default intake checklist has 7 fields: network, contract address, token name, symbol, logo file, official website, and relevant public references. Add a project contact who can confirm ownership or answer factual questions. Do not send private keys, recovery phrases, or wallet access credentials.
We check the logo against the destination’s current published guidance. We also flag stale links, inconsistent spelling, ambiguous network labels, and branding that differs between the file and official project pages. Your team should confirm the final contract address directly from the relevant explorer before review begins.
A clean package shortens clarification work. It does not replace a platform’s own review. If the same token also needs a profile correction, keep that request distinct and consider the DEXTools and DEXScreener profile update service.
How do Trust Wallet and Jupiter requests differ?
The destination determines the request, evidence, and status check. Trust Wallet asset work concerns the wallet-facing asset information and logo request. Jupiter verification is a separate platform request. We do not treat either outcome as evidence of acceptance by the other.
For each destination, we first identify the current public instructions or interface available to the project. We then organize the matching token details and references. Our record keeps 3 statuses distinct: prepared, submitted, and visibly updated. A submitted request is not described as a completed wallet display.
Wallet tracking is another separate question. It concerns whether a token can be found or displayed within a wallet interface. It does not automatically mean that a platform has verified the project or that a logo correction has propagated. We report only the result visible at the named destination.
If your scope also includes market data services, keep those requests separate. CoinGecko listing support addresses a tracker listing, not wallet inclusion. The CoinMarketCap community verification service covers another distinct profile workflow.
What will the wallet submission record show?
The handoff record shows what was sent, where it went, and what response followed. You receive a readiness checklist, a list of unresolved details, and status notes for each named destination. We keep the record factual and distinguish submitted work from a visible change.
Our default record captures 6 items: destination, token and network, requested outcome, submitted materials, response or open question, and visible status. We use 2 review checkpoints. The first checks asset consistency before handoff. The second checks the reported response or wallet-facing result after follow-up.
The work runs in a clear sequence:
- We compare the supplied token details with your public references.
- We flag gaps for your team to resolve.
- We prepare the materials for the applicable current route.
- We record the handoff and follow up on the named status.
A single project contact helps keep corrections consistent. If the logo or project identity changes during review, tell us before follow-up. We can then update the working materials rather than tracking an outdated version. For a separate circulating supply question, use circulating supply verification.
Where does a wallet platform control the result?
The record can show whether the package was complete, which exact file and public references were sent, and whether the platform requested clarification. We note the network and contract address beside the target wallet. This lets us match a response to the correct asset rather than another token with a similar name. If the platform asks for a correction, we log the requested field and the revised material before any further handoff. A team should keep one approved logo and one project contact active during this stage. Our follow-up checks the named wallet surface and reports what is visible, not an assumed result. Platform teams control review criteria, acceptance, display behavior, and refresh timing. We cannot promise a decision, logo display, verification, or update date; we can deliver the agreed preparation, handoff coordination, and status record.
When should wallet work sit beside other token updates?
A shared source of token facts helps when several destinations need updates. Keep each platform request separate, but use one approved record for the contract, network, name, symbol, and official project links. This makes inconsistencies easier to spot across wallet, explorer, and tracker work.
A practical order is to confirm token identity first, prepare wallet materials next, then handle other profile or listing requests through their own routes. If the project needs supply information reviewed, coordinate that as a separate circulating supply verification request. For broader market tracker submissions, see CoinGecko listing support. Wallet inclusion does not update those records automatically.
To begin, send the target wallet, network, contract address, desired visible outcome, logo file, and official project links. We will check the materials, identify the relevant workstream, and return a preparation checklist before submission coordination starts.
How it works
- Name the destinationTell us the wallet and the requested outcome. We record each destination separately when the scope includes more than one.
- Send public asset detailsShare the network, contract address, token name and symbol, logo, and official project references. Keep private keys and recovery information out of the package.
- Check consistencyGeoMarketing Experts compares the supplied details with the references you identify. We flag missing or conflicting fields for your team to resolve.
- Prepare the handoffWe organize the agreed materials for the applicable current route and record what is submitted to each named platform.
- Track the visible statusWe note platform responses and check the wallet-facing result. The report separates a pending request from a visible update.
Frequently asked questions
Which files and token details should we send first?
Send the exact network and contract address, token name and symbol, logo file, and official project links. Add the wallet you want reviewed and the visible outcome you are seeking. Our 7-field intake checklist also identifies a project contact for clarifications. Do not send private keys, recovery phrases, or account credentials.
Does Trust Wallet inclusion also settle Jupiter verification?
No. These are separate destination requests with separate materials and status checks. We record each one independently, so a Trust Wallet submission is not reported as Jupiter verification. If you want both reviewed, name both targets at kickoff and provide the same approved token facts for each.
How should we read a submission marked as pending?
Pending means the materials were handed off but no visible completion has been recorded. Our status record separates prepared, submitted, and visibly updated. We note any response or request for clarification, then follow up on the specific wallet surface. This avoids presenting a handoff as a completed asset display.
Can you promise the wallet will show our logo?
No. The named platform controls acceptance, asset display, and refresh timing. We can commit to the agreed preparation, handoff coordination, and follow-up, then report the result visible in the wallet. A platform response or display change is not within our control.
What if the wallet shows our token with old branding?
Send a screenshot or other visible record, the correct logo, the network and contract address, and an official reference for the current branding. We will check whether the issue concerns the wallet asset record or a separate profile source. The correction route depends on that distinction, so we track it as its own request.
Can one wallet submission update every token tracker?
No. Wallet asset work and tracker profiles have separate destinations and request routes. We keep the wallet handoff distinct from services such as CoinGecko listing support or explorer token information updates. Tell us which surfaces need correction so each can be scoped and tracked.
Tell us about your project
Answer four quick questions and a manager will send you a plan, timing and a price range within the hour. Everything stays confidential.
Loading the form…