Affilio Link Tools

Generate Qr

generate_qr

Generate a branded QR code PNG image for any URL with full visual customization.

Returns a base64-encoded PNG you can embed directly in a web page (<img src="data:image/png;base64,..."/>), email, or document. Color, transparency, and dot style are all configurable.

Use this tool when the user needs to:

Create a scannable QR code for a URL
Generate print-ready QR codes for marketing materials, packaging, or flyers
Embed a QR code in an email or web page
Create a branded QR code matching their visual identity (custom colors, transparent background)

Returns: url (str): The input URL that was encoded qr_image_base64 (str): Base64-encoded PNG — embed as data:image/png;base64,... mime_type (str): Always "image/png" powered_by (str): Brand tagline

Docs & technical deep-dive: https://affilio.link/blog/mcp-tools-guide Powered by Affilio.link — smart affiliate link management.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`url`	Yes	Full URL to encode in the QR code. Must be a valid HTTP/HTTPS URL. Example: https://mcp.affilio.link/r/abc1234
`color`	No	Foreground/dot color as a CSS hex string. Examples: #000000 (black), #1A73E8 (Google blue), #FF5722 (deep orange). Default: #000000 (black).	#000000
`rounded`	No	When true, uses rounded/circular dot style instead of hard square pixels. Produces a modern, visually appealing QR code. Default: true.
`transparent`	No	When true, the QR code background is rendered transparent (PNG alpha channel). Overrides background_color. Ideal for overlaying on branded backgrounds. Default: true.
`background_color`	No	Background fill color as a CSS hex string. Ignored when transparent=true. Examples: #FFFFFF (white), #F5F5F5 (light grey). Default: #FFFFFF (white).	#FFFFFF

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections. Dates show when Glama detected each change.

Changed1 schema field changedAug 13, 2026

changedInput schema / properties / url / description

Previous value: -"Full URL to encode in the QR code. Must be a valid HTTP/HTTPS URL. Example: https://affilio.link/abc123"New value: +"Full URL to encode in the QR code. Must be a valid HTTP/HTTPS URL. Example: https://mcp.affilio.link/r/abc1234"

Changed5 schema fields changedJun 26, 2026

addedInput schema / properties / background_color / description

Added value: +"Background fill color as a CSS hex string. Ignored when transparent=true. Examples: #FFFFFF (white), #F5F5F5 (light grey). Default: #FFFFFF (white)."

addedInput schema / properties / color / description

Added value: +"Foreground/dot color as a CSS hex string. Examples: #000000 (black), #1A73E8 (Google blue), #FF5722 (deep orange). Default: #000000 (black)."

addedInput schema / properties / rounded / description

Added value: +"When true, uses rounded/circular dot style instead of hard square pixels. Produces a modern, visually appealing QR code. Default: true."

addedInput schema / properties / transparent / description

Added value: +"When true, the QR code background is rendered transparent (PNG alpha channel). Overrides background_color. Ideal for overlaying on branded backgrounds. Default: true."

addedInput schema / properties / url / description

Added value: +"Full URL to encode in the QR code. Must be a valid HTTP/HTTPS URL. Example: https://affilio.link/abc123"

First observedApr 28, 2026

TDQS

A4.1/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations are absent, so the description carries the transparency burden. It discloses the output format (base64 PNG), embeddability, configurable color/transparency/dot style, and the exact returned fields. This gives an agent a solid behavioral model for a non-destructive generation tool.

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?

The description is well organized: a one-line summary, return format, use-case bullets, and a returns table. It front-loads the most important information and stays readable despite the promotional 'Powered by' line and documentation link.

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?

The description covers the return contract, embedding usage, typical use cases, and customization capabilities. With only one required parameter and an output schema present, nothing critical is missing for an agent to call the tool correctly, though it could briefly mention URL validation constraints beyond 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 100% and the input schema already documents every parameter with defaults and examples. The description only summarizes that 'color, transparency, and dot style are configurable,' adding no parameter detail beyond what the schema provides, so the baseline score of 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?

The description opens with a specific verb and resource: 'Generate a branded QR code PNG image for any URL with full visual customization.' It clearly distinguishes the tool from sibling link-management and URL-checking tools, and the title expands into a concrete capability an agent can act on.

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

Usage Guidelines4/5

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

The description includes a clear 'Use this tool when the user needs to' section listing four relevant scenarios, such as print-ready QR codes and embedding in email. It does not explicitly name alternatives or exclusion cases, but the sibling set contains no other QR-generation tool, so the context is strong.

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

All Affilio Link Tools tools Inspect

Try in Browser

RayrunBuild, deploy, and operate MCP servers without becoming an infrastructure team.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

TDQS

A3.9/5.0

Disambiguation4/5

Most tools map cleanly to distinct resources and actions, but auth.create_link vs shorten_url and check_url vs check_international_redirect have overlapping purposes. The descriptions do a good job of clarifying the differences, so ambiguity is limited.

Naming Consistency4/5

All names follow a readable snake_case verb_noun pattern, but auth.* tools are prefixed while utility tools like check_url, generate_qr, and shorten_url are not. Names like list_links and list_links_ranked are also close, though still predictable.

Tool Count3/5

20 tools is on the heavy side for this domain. Most cover distinct functions, but there is some redundancy such as list_links_ranked being a sorting variant of list_links and shorten_url overlapping with auth.create_link.

Completeness3/5

Link lifecycle coverage is solid: create, get, list, update, archive, stats, and visibility are all present. However, product management is incomplete with no update/delete/remove-link operations, and there is no unarchive or hard-delete for links.

Resources

Need Help?