A
licenseNot graded
qualityD
maintenanceEnables AI assistants to search through structured databases and unstructured content (documents, videos, files) using natural language queries with semantic understanding.
MIT
video-material-db
by JimmyChin756
Video Material DB (Base de datos semántica de materiales de vídeo)
Una base de conocimiento local-first para la investigación y creación de vídeos cortas. Unifica vídeos, subítulos y análisisstructurado por IA en PostgreSQL, y ofrece búsqueda de lenguaje natural a través de la interfaz web, la API REST y las herramientes MCP. Los materialos y los datos analíticos se guardan de manera predeterminada en el ejecución propio del usuario.
Funcipales
Importar materiículas desde archos locales, carpetas o enlaces públicos de vídeo.
Recoleccionar listas de vídeos de creadores en plataformas como 抖音, TikTok, YouTube, B站, etc.
Completar automáticamente el procesaiento de vídeo, la transcripción de voz, la extracción de fotogramas claves y el análisis visual.
Extraer personajes, escenas, planos, dialogoos, estructura narrativa, puntos de humor y sugerencias de adaptación.
Us reco pgvector para crear un índice semántco y buscar vídeos, dialogo y elementos narrativos en lenguaje natural.
Gestinar materialos y tareas de segundo plano mediante la interfaz web de FastAPI.
Integrar herramientas de IA como Codex a través de MCP.
Compatibilidad con la deduplicación de materialos, processamiento asíncronico, reenticos de errores and exportación masiva.
Related MCP server: youtube-mcp
Escenarios de uso
Escritores de vídeos de corta duración buscan referencias de tramas, dialogoos, puntos de humor, giros de trama y planos de cámara.
Equipos de contenidos crean bibliotecas de casos de vídeo and a biblioteca de conocimiento creativo number.
Analizar la estructura, el rimo narrativo y la expresión visual de creadores usted.
Buscar patrones de creación reutizable entre los vídeos de referisografía.
For our assist IA, propica estructurada and trazabe de issue materials de investigación.
Componentos técnicos
Python 3.11+
FastAPI
PostgreSQL + pgvector
MCP Server
ffmpeg / ffprobe
Interfaz compatible con 通义千问 (ASR, análisis visual y vector embeddings)
Cómo empezar
Consulta INISALL.md para los pasaponos de instalado. Materiales saved por defecto in ./data .
python3 -m venv .venv
.venv/bin/pip install -e .
cp .env.example .envTras arrancar la base de datos, ejecuta el servidor web y order de las tareas de análisis en segundo plano por separado:
.venv/bin/video-db-api
.venv/bin/video-db-workerAbre el navegador for http://127.0.0.1:8000/.
Integración con MCP
codex mcp add video-material-db -- <仓库绝对路径>/.venv/bin/video-db-mcplas herramientes incluyen add_video_url, add_local_video, search_videos, search_dialogue, search_jokes, search_story_structure y get_video_detail.
Datos and seguridad
El repositorio público always contains only source public source code. .env, API keys, video files, DB contents, copias de seguridad, local paths and perosnal data never go into version control.
Available Tools
8 toolsadd_local_videoD
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| path | Yes |
TDQS
D1/5.0
Behavior1/5
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Tool has no description.
Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.
Conciseness1/5
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
Tool has no description.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Completeness1/5
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
Tool has no description.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Parameters1/5
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
Tool has no description.
Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.
Purpose1/5
Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?
Tool has no description.
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Usage Guidelines1/5
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
Tool has no description.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
add_video_urlD
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| url | Yes |
TDQS
D1/5.0
Behavior1/5
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Tool has no description.
Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.
Conciseness1/5
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
Tool has no description.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Completeness1/5
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
Tool has no description.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Parameters1/5
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
Tool has no description.
Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.
Purpose1/5
Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?
Tool has no description.
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Usage Guidelines1/5
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
Tool has no description.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
build_remake_contextD
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| video_id | Yes |
TDQS
D1/5.0
Behavior1/5
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Tool has no description.
Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.
Conciseness1/5
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
Tool has no description.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Completeness1/5
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
Tool has no description.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Parameters1/5
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
Tool has no description.
Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.
Purpose1/5
Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?
Tool has no description.
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Usage Guidelines1/5
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
Tool has no description.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
get_video_detailD
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| video_id | Yes |
TDQS
D1/5.0
Behavior1/5
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Tool has no description.
Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.
Conciseness1/5
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
Tool has no description.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Completeness1/5
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
Tool has no description.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Parameters1/5
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
Tool has no description.
Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.
Purpose1/5
Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?
Tool has no description.
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Usage Guidelines1/5
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
Tool has no description.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
search_dialogueD
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| limit | No | ||
| query | Yes |
TDQS
D1/5.0
Behavior1/5
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Tool has no description.
Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.
Conciseness1/5
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
Tool has no description.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Completeness1/5
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
Tool has no description.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Parameters1/5
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
Tool has no description.
Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.
Purpose1/5
Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?
Tool has no description.
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Usage Guidelines1/5
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
Tool has no description.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
search_jokesD
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| limit | No | ||
| query | Yes |
TDQS
D1/5.0
Behavior1/5
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Tool has no description.
Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.
Conciseness1/5
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
Tool has no description.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Completeness1/5
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
Tool has no description.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Parameters1/5
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
Tool has no description.
Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.
Purpose1/5
Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?
Tool has no description.
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Usage Guidelines1/5
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
Tool has no description.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
search_story_structureD
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| limit | No | ||
| query | Yes |
TDQS
D1/5.0
Behavior1/5
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Tool has no description.
Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.
Conciseness1/5
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
Tool has no description.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Completeness1/5
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
Tool has no description.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Parameters1/5
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
Tool has no description.
Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.
Purpose1/5
Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?
Tool has no description.
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Usage Guidelines1/5
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
Tool has no description.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
search_videosD
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| limit | No | ||
| query | Yes |
TDQS
D1/5.0
Behavior1/5
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Tool has no description.
Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.
Conciseness1/5
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
Tool has no description.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Completeness1/5
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
Tool has no description.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Parameters1/5
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
Tool has no description.
Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.
Purpose1/5
Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?
Tool has no description.
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Usage Guidelines1/5
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
Tool has no description.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Tool Schema Changelog
Recent tool additions, removals, and schema changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
8 tool updates
v0.2.1- First observed
add_local_video - First observed
add_video_url - First observed
build_remake_context - First observed
get_video_detail - First observed
search_dialogue - First observed
search_jokes - First observed
search_story_structure - First observed
search_videos
TDQS
C2.1/5.0
Scored across 8 tools
Disambiguation5/5
All tools have clearly distinct purposes. Adding via URL vs local file are distinct, and the various search tools target different content types (videos, dialogue, jokes, story structure), so there is no ambiguity in what each tool does.
Naming Consistency5/5
All tool names follow the same verb_noun pattern in snake_case: add_, search_, get_, build_. This is fully consistent across the entire set.
Tool Count5/5
8 tools is well-scoped for a video material database. The set covers ingestion (add), retrieval (search, get), and a specialized operation (build_remake_context) without unnecessary bloat.
Completeness4/5
The main workflows of adding, searching across content types, and retrieving details are covered. Minor gaps exist—no update/delete operations for videos and no general list all videos—but agents can work around these with the provided search tools.
Maintenance
ActivitySlowing
ResponsivenessNo issues
Related MCP Connectors
Video analysis AI: transcripts, summaries, visual scenes/shots, clips, answers in natural language.
Video knowledge base for agents: search your library's transcripts, keyframes and on-screen text.
Edit video by talking to your AI — search footage, cut timelines, apply effects, add captions.
Shot breakdowns of video clips, plus logos and brand kits, for any AI assistant.
Related MCP Servers
- AlicenseNot gradedqualityDmaintenanceEnables AI assistants to watch YouTube videos by extracting frames at scene changes and visual references, pairing each frame with the exact words spoken at that timestamp. Provides dense frame-transcript interleaving for any model.13 npm5MIT
VZT Video-Intelofficial
AlicenseNot gradedqualityDmaintenanceSelf-hosted video intelligence pipeline that turns video into structured, citable, queryable JSON scene graphs, enabling AI assistants to analyze and search across video libraries without re-processing.15 npm1MIT- FlicenseNot gradedqualityDmaintenanceEnables natural language search through personal video collections, returning AI-generated descriptions and direct URLs to relevant 30-second video clips.-