Skip to main content
Glama
liangjunyu2010

Baidu Cloud AI Content Safety MCP Server

百度云大模型内容安全MCP Server

本代码仓库包含一个 MCP 服务器,它提供对百度云大模型内容安全功能的访问。

前提条件

在使用百度云大模型内容安全MCP Server之前,请确保你具备以下条件:

  1. Python 3.10 或更高版本

  2. 已安装uv用于运行MCP Server

Related MCP server: Baidu Vector Database MCP Server

使用方式

使用百度云大模型内容安全MCP Server的推荐方式是通过uv运行,而无需进行安装。

克隆代码仓库,执行以下命令:

git clone https://github.com/liangjunyu2010/mcp_server_safe_content_check.git
cd mcp_server_safe_content_check

随后,你可以直接通过uv运行,其中BAIDU_CLOUD_ACCESS_KEY_IDBAIDU_CLOUD_SECRET_ACCESS_KEY根据实际需要修改:

uv run src/mcp_server_safe_content_check/server.py 
uv run src/mcp_server_safe_content_check/server.py --BAIDU_CLOUD_ACCESS_KEY_ID ACCESS_KEY --BAIDU_CLOUD_SECRET_ACCESS_KEY SECRET_KEY

或者,在src/mcp_server_safe_content_check/目录中修改.env文件来设置环境变量,再使用以下命令运行服务器:

uv run src/mcp_server_safe_content_check/server.py 

支持的应用程序

百度云大模型内容安全MCP Server可以与各种支持模型上下文协议的大语言模型应用程序配合使用:

  • Cursor:支持 MCP 的人工智能代码编辑器

  • 自定义 MCP 客户端:任何实现 MCP 客户端规范的应用程序

在 Cursor 中的使用方法

Cursor 也支持 MCP工具。你可以通过两种方式将百度MCP Server添加到Cursor中:

依次打开Cursor设置>功能>MCP,点击+添加新的MCP服务器按钮,在mcp.json中添加以下配置:

{
    "mcpServers": {
        "safe-content-check": {
            "command": "uv",
            "args": [
                "run",
                "--with",
                "mcp[cli]",
                "mcp",
                "run",
                "/PATH/mcp_server_safe_content_check/src/mcp_server_safe_content_check/server.py"
            ],
            "env": {
                "BAIDU_CLOUD_ACCESS_KEY_ID": "****",
                "BAIDU_CLOUD_SECRET_ACCESS_KEY": "****"
            }
        }
    }
}

重启 Cursor 或重新加载窗口。

可用工具

百度云大模型内容安全MCP Server提供以下工具:

输入检测操作

  • input_analyze: 检测输入内容

    • 参数:

      • text: 输入的文本内容

环境变量

百度云IAM创建 权限选择 AFDFullControlAccessPolicy

  • BAIDU_CLOUD_ACCESS_KEY_ID: 百度云授权ACCESS_KEY

  • BAIDU_CLOUD_SECRET_ACCESS_KEY: 百度云授权SECRET_KEY

使用样例

使用Cursor

Example : 检查文件内容是否存在不安全信息

帮忙检测下风险

Cursor将使用百度云大模型内容安全MCP Server提供的input_analyze来检测输入内容是否安全.

检测结果显示,该文本内容存在极高风险:
风险类型:犯罪相关内容(hitType: crime)
风险评分:0.998(满分1分)
处理建议:严禁传播(action: 2)
安全评估:内容不安全(isSafe: 0)

Available Tools

1 tool
input_analyzeC
Name:
    检测文本安全

Description:
    将文本进行检测,判断是否存在风险内容

Args:
    text:  待检测文本
ParametersJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
textYes

TDQS

C2.9/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It mentions detecting risky content but doesn't specify what types of risks (e.g., hate speech, spam), how results are returned, error conditions, or any rate limits. This leaves significant gaps for an agent to understand the tool's behavior.

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 appropriately sized and front-loaded with the tool's name and purpose. It uses a clear structure with Name, Description, and Args sections, though the formatting could be more polished. Every sentence earns its place without unnecessary elaboration.

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 the lack of annotations and output schema, the description is incomplete. It doesn't explain what the output looks like (e.g., risk score, categories), error handling, or operational constraints. For a tool with behavioral complexity (risk detection), this leaves too many unknowns for an agent.

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 0%, so the description must compensate. It adds meaning by specifying 'text' as '待检测文本' (text to be detected), which clarifies the parameter's purpose. However, it doesn't provide details on text length limits, language support, or format requirements, leaving some ambiguity.

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 tool's purpose: '检测文本安全' (detect text safety) and '将文本进行检测,判断是否存在风险内容' (analyze text to determine if it contains risky content). It specifies the verb (detect/analyze) and resource (text), though it doesn't differentiate from siblings since none exist.

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 is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. The description only states what the tool does, not when it should be invoked or any prerequisites. With no sibling tools, this is less critical, but still a gap in usage context.

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

TDQS

B3.1/5.0
Disambiguation5/5

With only one tool, there is no possibility of ambiguity or overlap between tools. The tool has a single, clear purpose: analyzing text for safety risks, which cannot be confused with any other tool in this set.

Naming Consistency5/5

The naming is trivially consistent as there is only one tool. The tool name 'input_analyze' follows a clear verb_noun pattern, and with no other tools to compare, it cannot exhibit any inconsistency.

Tool Count2/5

A single tool is too few for a server with the broad purpose of 'Baidu Cloud AI Content Safety,' which suggests capabilities like image analysis, video moderation, or multiple text checks (e.g., spam, hate speech). This minimal set severely limits the server's utility and scope.

Completeness2/5

The server is severely incomplete for content safety. It only handles text input analysis, missing obvious gaps like image or video safety checks, batch processing, or different risk categories (e.g., political, adult). This will cause agent failures when non-text content needs moderation.

Maintenance

ActivityInactive
ResponsivenessSyncing

Resources

Unclaimed servers have limited discoverability.

Looking for Admin?

If you are the server author, to access and configure the admin panel.

Related MCP Connectors

Related MCP Servers

  • A
    license
    B
    quality
    D
    maintenance
    A server that provides access to Baidu Cloud Vector Database functionality through the Model Context Protocol, enabling LLM applications to perform vector searches and database operations via natural language.
    14
    3
    Apache 2.0
  • F
    license
    Not graded
    quality
    D
    maintenance
    A minimal Model Context Protocol server that provides a safety guardrail tool to check if provided context is free from code injection or harmful content.
  • A
    license
    C
    quality
    C
    maintenance
    A Model Context Protocol (MCP) server that provides AI-powered security analysis and safety instruction tools. This server helps protect AI agents by providing security guidelines, content analysis, and cautionary instructions when interacting with various MCPs and external services.
    6
    53
    21
    ISC

Latest Blog Posts

MCP directory API

We provide all the information about MCP servers via our MCP API.

curl -X GET 'https://glama.ai/api/mcp/v1/servers/liangjunyu2010/mcp_server_safe_content_check'

If you have feedback or need assistance with the MCP directory API, please join our Discord server