Scan QRCode MCP Server
Server Configuration
Describes the environment variables required to run the server.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
Instructions
Guidance the server publishes about itself, which clients place ahead of the tool catalog so the model reads it before choosing anything.
This server publishes no instructions, or was last inspected before Glama recorded them.
Capabilities
Server capabilities have not been inspected yet.
Tools
Functions exposed to the LLM to take actions
| Name | Description |
|---|---|
| decode_qrcode_data_urlC | Decode a QR code from a data URL (data:;base64,...) |
| decode_qrcode_image_urlC | Decode a QR code from an HTTP(S) image URL |
Prompts
Interactive templates invoked by user choice
| Name | Description |
|---|---|
No prompts | |
Resources
Contextual data attached and managed by the client
| Name | Description |
|---|---|
No resources | |
TDQS
Scored across 2 tools
The two tools have clearly distinct purposes: one decodes QR codes from data URLs, while the other decodes from HTTP(S) image URLs. There is no overlap or ambiguity between them, making it easy for an agent to select the correct tool based on the input source.
Both tools follow a consistent verb_noun pattern with 'decode_qrcode_' as a prefix, followed by 'data_url' and 'image_url'. The naming is uniform and predictable, using snake_case throughout without any deviations.
With only two tools, the server feels thin for a QR code decoding domain, as it might lack operations like encoding QR codes or handling local file inputs. However, the count is reasonable for a minimal decoding-focused server, though it borders on being too limited.
The server is severely incomplete for QR code operations, as it only provides decoding from two specific input types (data URLs and image URLs). There are significant gaps, such as no encoding tools, no support for local files, and no error handling or validation tools, which could lead to agent failures in broader use cases.