Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In

qrlia

by com.qrlia
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

Create QR code

qrs_create

Create a QR code of any type (url, profile_card, multilink, menu, feedback, coupon, lead_form, pdf, image, audio, video, app, dpp, text, email, phone, sms, whatsapp, wifi, vcard, event, sepa, paypal, crypto), optionally with a saved design, in a folder or a specific company. Returns the code with its short link.

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
typeYesQR type. `url` redirects; landing types open a hosted page; the rest encode content directly.
labelYes
rulesNotype=url only, paid plans: smart-redirect rules (country/device/schedule → targetUrl); first match wins.
accessNoPassword, start date, expiry date or scan limit.
contentNoEverything except url. Fields per type — profile_card: displayName, title?, organization?, tagline?, avatarUrl?, emails?, phones?, website?, address?, socials?, note? · multilink: title, tagline?, avatarUrl?, links[{title, url, description?}] · menu: title, tagline?, currency?, sections[{title, description?, items[{name, description?, priceCents?, …}]}] · feedback: title, tagline?, ratingLabel?, thankYou?, requireContact?, notifyEmail?, reviewUrl? (Google review link shown after a good rating), reviewMinRating? · coupon: title, offer, code?, validUntil?, terms?, ctaLabel?, ctaUrl?, imageUrl? · lead_form: title, intro?, fields[{key, label, type: text|email|phone|textarea|select|checkbox, required?, options?}], consentText (shown with a mandatory checkbox), submitLabel?, thankYou?, redirectUrl? · pdf: fileUrl, title?, description?, filename? · image: fileUrl, title?, caption?, alt? · audio: title, fileUrl, artist?, coverUrl? · video: fileUrl, title?, description?, posterUrl? · app: iosUrl?, androidUrl?, fallbackUrl?, title?, tagline?, iconUrl? · dpp: productName, manufacturer, gtin, … · text: {text} · email: {to, subject?, body?} · phone: {number} · sms: {number, message?} · whatsapp: {number, message?} · wifi: {ssid, password?, auth: WPA|WEP|nopass, hidden?} · vcard: {firstName, lastName?, organization?, title?, email?, phone?, website?} · event: {title, start, end?, location?, description?, allDay?} · sepa: {name, iban, bic?, amount? (EUR), reference? | text?} (EPC/GiroCode bank transfer) · paypal: {username, amount?, currency?} · crypto: {currency: bitcoin|ethereum|litecoin, address, amount?, label?}. The text…crypto types are static: their content is printed into the code (no short link, no scan stats). Upload files first with uploads_create and use the returned url.
designIdNoSaved design to render with (designs_list).
folderIdNoFolder (folders_list); plan feature.
trackingNoAnalytics tags and opt-in location for the landing page; URL codes show a short consent page first.
companyIdNoCompany to create it in; default = your pinned company or the workspace default.
targetUrlNotype=url only: where the code redirects.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed3 schema fields changed
    • changedInput schema / properties / access / properties / fallbackUrl / anyOf
      Previous value: -[
-  {
-    "format": "uri",
-    "type": "string"
-  },
-  {
-    "type": "null"
-  }
-]New value: +[
+  {
+    "maxLength": 2000,
+    "type": "string"
+  },
+  {
+    "type": "null"
+  }
+]
    • removedInput schema / properties / targetUrl / format
      Removed value: -"uri"
    • addedInput schema / properties / targetUrl / maxLength
      Added value: +2000
  2. First observed

TDQS

B3.3/5.0
Behavior3/5

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

Annotations already establish the safety profile (not read-only, not destructive, closed-world), so the description only needs to add operational context. It adds that the code is created in a folder/company and returned with a short link, which is useful, but omits that some types are static with no short link, that smart-redirect rules are plan-gated, and that landing-page codes show a consent page before redirecting.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness3/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The second sentence is tight and front-loads the scoping/return facts, but the first sentence spends most of its length enumerating 24 type values that the schema enum already lists, which is redundant rather than informative. No structural flaw, but meaningful waste.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness3/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

For a 10-parameter tool with nested objects and no output schema, the description does state the return value, which is otherwise undocumented. However it says only "Returns the code with its short link", which is incomplete and arguably misleading for the static types the schema says have no short link, and it leaves the uploads_create dependency and plan gating to the schema.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters3/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema description coverage is 90%, so the schema already documents type, access, content, tracking, designId, folderId and companyId in detail. The description's only parameter-level contribution is restating the type enum and naming design/folder/company, which is already covered; baseline 3 applies.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose4/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

States a specific verb and resource ("Create a QR code") plus the supported type set, scoping constraints (design, folder, company) and the return (short link). It does not distinguish itself from close siblings such as qrs_create_url, qrs_create_from_template or qrs_bulk_create, so an agent cannot tell from the description alone when this general tool is preferred.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines3/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

"of any type" implicitly positions this as the general-purpose creator versus the type-specific sibling qrs_create_url, but the routing is left to inference. There is no explicit when-to-use/when-not-to-use statement, no mention that url codes are the ones needing targetUrl/rules, and no mention of the uploads_create prerequisite.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.

All qrlia toolsInspect
Try in Browser
One endpoint for every MCP toolRayrun runs every MCP server behind one URL and holds the credentials. Each call is decided per client, tool, and argument, then recorded.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

Resources