QRStuff MCP Server

Create static QR code

create_static_qr_code

Read-onlyIdempotent

Use this when the user wants a QR code image for a web link, plain text, Wi-Fi network, email, phone number, text message or contact card and does not need to edit, track or manage it afterwards. Returns a PNG or SVG image and a download link. No account is needed. The code cannot be changed after it is made and no scan counts are kept. Do not use it when the user wants to edit the destination later, see scan numbers, add a logo, or make a code for a file, menu, landing page, business card or product (use generate_qr_code).

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "type": "<type>"
    },
    "name": "create_static_qr_code"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`url`	No	For URL: the web address, starting with https://.
`text`	No	For TEXT: the text, up to 2,000 characters.
`type`	Yes	What the code holds: URL, TEXT, WIFI, EMAIL, PHONE, SMS or CONTACT.
`format`	No	png (default) or svg.	png
`email_to`	No	For EMAIL: the recipient address.
`wifi_name`	No	For WIFI: the network name (SSID).
`email_body`	No	For EMAIL: optional message text.
`sms_message`	No	For SMS: optional message text.
`wifi_hidden`	No	For WIFI: true if the network name is hidden.
`phone_number`	No	For PHONE or SMS: the number, with country code.
`contact_email`	No	For CONTACT: email address.
`contact_phone`	No	For CONTACT: phone number.
`email_subject`	No	For EMAIL: optional subject line.
`wifi_password`	No	For WIFI: the password. Include only if the user gave it. Leave empty for open networks.
`wifi_security`	No	For WIFI: WPA (most home networks), WEP or nopass.
`contact_website`	No	For CONTACT: website address.
`background_color`	No	Hex colour such as #ffffff.
`foreground_color`	No	Hex colour such as #000000. Keep strong contrast with the background so the code scans.
`contact_last_name`	No	For CONTACT: last name.
`contact_first_name`	No	For CONTACT: first name.
`contact_organization`	No	For CONTACT: company or organisation.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

AddedOct 30, 2026

TDQS

A4.5/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

Adds real context beyond the annotations: no account required, the code is immutable after creation, no scan counts are kept, and the return is a PNG/SVG image plus a download link. The immutability and no-tracking statements also explain why `readOnlyHint: true` is correct for a 'create' tool, heading off a contradiction an agent might otherwise infer.

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

Conciseness4/5

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

Front-loaded with the use case, then the return value, then the negative routing — a good information order. Slightly long because the content types are enumerated once in prose despite the `type` enum already listing them, but nothing is filler.

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

Completeness4/5

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

With 21 parameters and no output schema, the description carries the important missing pieces: what it returns (image + download link) and which of the many siblings to use instead. Minor gaps remain around image sizing/resolution and failure behavior, but an agent has enough to call it correctly.

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 100% and every parameter already carries a 'For URL:/For WIFI:/For CONTACT:' qualifier, so the per-type conditional logic is fully documented in the schema. The description only echoes the seven content types at a high level and adds no format, length, or value constraints beyond that; baseline 3 is appropriate.

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

Purpose5/5

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

States a specific verb (create) and resource (static QR code), lists the supported content types, and explicitly contrasts itself with `generate_qr_code` for the dynamic case. An agent can distinguish this from the many other create_* QR siblings without opening any schema.

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

Usage Guidelines5/5

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

Gives an explicit positive condition ('user wants a QR code image ... and does not need to edit, track or manage it afterwards') and an explicit negative list (edit destination later, see scan numbers, add a logo, code for file/menu/landing page/business card/product) with the named alternative `generate_qr_code`. This is the textbook when/when-not/alternative pattern.

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

All QRStuff MCP Server tools Inspect

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

Need Help?