MCP Content Credentials Server
Related Servers
Alternatives to MCP Content Credentials Server
No user-submitted related servers found.
Related Servers
- AlicenseAqualityBmaintenanceVerifies C2PA Content Credentials for local files or URLs and returns an LLM-ready verdict on trust, AI generation, and provenance.424 npm2Apache 2.0
- AlicenseNot gradedqualityBmaintenanceEnables an agent to determine whether an image is AI-generated, edited, or captured by reading signed C2PA Content Credentials first and falling back to labelled pixel-level forensic heuristics (noise, ELA, spectral, colour, EXIF) only when no manifest exists. Runs fully offline with no API keys or cloud calls, and can report tampering when pixels no longer match a signed hash.MIT
- AlicenseAqualityAmaintenanceEnables AI agents to analyze images from a URL, local path, or Base64 string and determine whether they are AI-generated, including detection of signatures from Flux, Midjourney, DALL·E, and Stable Diffusion. Also inspects cryptographic C2PA provenance manifests, signing certificate authorities, and camera EXIF metadata without requiring API keys or accounts.271 npmMIT
- AlicenseNot gradedqualityBmaintenanceProvides AI content watermarking and C2PA compliance for EU AI Act Article 50, enabling detection, verification, and batch processing of authenticated content.2 npm30 PyPIMIT
- AlicenseAqualityDmaintenanceProvides MCP-compatible AI agents with a verify_image tool to check a photo's capture time and provenance using C2PA, EXIF, XMP metadata, and pixel forensics, returning a verdict and confidence score.151 npm2MIT
- AlicenseNot gradedqualityCmaintenanceExposes detection tools that inspect a file or a text string for provenance signals such as C2PA, IPTC XMP, GB 45438 AIGC labels, embedded metadata, embedded certificates and configurable remote text verifiers, and reports which capabilities are checkable per provider and modality. It is detection-only, so nothing it exposes removes, rewrites or perturbs a watermark.1MIT
TDQS
Scored across 2 tools
The two tools have clearly distinct purposes based on input source: read_credentials_file handles local files while read_credentials_url handles URLs. Their descriptions explicitly specify when to use each tool, eliminating any potential confusion about which to select for a given scenario.
Both tools follow an identical verb_noun pattern (read_credentials_file and read_credentials_url) with perfect consistency. The naming clearly indicates the action (read) and distinguishes the input type (file vs URL) in a predictable manner.
With only 2 tools, the server feels somewhat thin for a Content Credentials domain that could benefit from additional operations like validation, manifest listing, or credential creation. While the two tools cover the core reading functionality from different sources, the scope seems limited compared to what a comprehensive C2PA/credentials server might offer.
The server only provides read operations from two input sources, missing essential capabilities for a Content Credentials domain. There are no tools for creating, updating, validating, or managing credentials, nor tools to list available manifests or check credential status. This creates significant gaps that would limit agent workflows beyond basic information retrieval.