xendit-mcp

create_qr

Generate a QRIS QR code for payment. Specify type as dynamic or static, and include amount for dynamic codes.

Instructions

Create a QRIS QR code for payment.

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": {
      "external_id": "<external_id>",
      "type": "<type>"
    },
    "name": "create_qr"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`type`	Yes	QR code type
`amount`	No	Amount (required for DYNAMIC)
`external_id`	Yes	Unique QR code ID
`callback_url`	No	Webhook URL for payment notification

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv1.0.0Jul 30, 2026

TDQS

C2.7/5.0

Behavior2/5

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

Without annotations, the description should disclose behavioral traits. It only states creation, missing side effects, conditional requirements (amount for DYNAMIC), or return value details.

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

Conciseness2/5

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

One sentence is concise but under-specified for a tool with 4 parameters and conditional logic. More detail is needed without being verbose.

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

Completeness2/5

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

Given no output schema and no annotations, the description is incomplete. It lacks context on what the tool returns (e.g., QR image data), prerequisites, or payment flow integration.

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 coverage is 100%, so baseline is 3. The description adds no meaning beyond the schema; it does not explain the type enum or conditional requirement for amount.

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?

The description clearly states the action ('create') and resource ('QRIS QR code for payment'), but does not differentiate from sibling tools like create_invoice or create_ewallet_charge.

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

Usage Guidelines2/5

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

No guidance on when to use this tool vs alternatives (e.g., when to choose dynamic vs static QR, or QR vs invoice). No context provided.

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

Deploy Server