Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
strip-ai-metadata-mcp

strip-ai-metadata-mcp

by onsecrethunt
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Local

Show hidden metadata in files

inspect_files
Read-only

Reveals metadata in photos, videos, PDFs and RAW files—GPS, camera, author, dates, C2PA and AI tags—without changing them, so you can check files before sharing or verify a clean copy.

Instructions

Lists what photos, videos, PDFs and RAW files reveal without changing them: GPS location, camera, serial numbers, author, dates, C2PA Content Credentials, AI generator tags and AI prompts. Use it to check a file before sharing or to confirm a clean copy is clean.

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": {
      "paths": "<paths>"
    },
    "name": "inspect_files"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
pathsYesAbsolute paths of files or folders to inspect
recursiveNoInclude sub-folders when a folder is given.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

A3.8/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=false, and 'without changing them' is consistent with that rather than contradicting it. The description adds useful behavioral context about what data is exposed, but says nothing about performance on large folders, recursion implications, or failure behavior for unreadable/unsupported files.

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

Conciseness5/5

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

Two sentences, front-loaded with the resource and the enumerated outputs, followed by the practical use case. No filler or repetition, and every clause carries information.

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

Completeness4/5

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

With no output schema, the enumeration of returned metadata types (GPS, serials, C2PA, AI prompts) does much of the work a return-value section would. Combined with 100% schema coverage on a two-parameter tool, only edge cases like unsupported file types or folder-without-recursive handling remain unaddressed.

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 100% and both parameters (paths, recursive) are documented in the schema, so the baseline is 3. The description does not add any detail about path handling, folder traversal, or what happens when a folder is passed without recursive set.

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 opens with a specific verb (lists/reveals) and a concrete resource scope (photos, videos, PDFs, RAW files), then enumerates the exact metadata classes surfaced (GPS, camera, serial numbers, author, dates, C2PA, AI tags/prompts). 'Without changing them' implicitly separates it from the mutating sibling clean_files, though the sibling is never named explicitly.

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

Usage Guidelines4/5

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

It gives two clear usage contexts: checking a file before sharing and verifying that a cleaned copy is actually clean, the latter effectively positioning it as the verification step after clean_files. It stops short of explicit when-not-to-use guidance or naming the alternative tool outright.

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

Deploy Server

Other Tools