Skip to content
verify mcp Beta VerifyMCP is currently in beta. If you notice any issues, get in touch and we’ll put it right.

Bangermap

NPM · BANGERMAP-MCP

Find YouTube outliers, videos that beat their channel's own baseline, on your own free API key.

Available components

+1 this week 92 Trust /100

Last scanned (20 hours ago)

Scores higher than 94% of npm servers

Category Marketing and SEO

Trust breakdown (7 categories)

How this component scores in each security and reliability category. Every signal is checked automatically from public evidence about the published package, including repeated runs of it in an isolated sandbox, and we only credit what we can confirm. How we score → Why this is hard to score →

Supply Chain Security98
  • No malware found by supply-chain analysis.Pass
  • No known CVEs affecting this package version or its production dependencies.Pass
  • No install/post-install scripts declared.Pass
  • 31 of 92 dependencies flagged as unhealthy. View diagnostics → Partial
Provenance & Transparency97
  • Source repository is publicly reachable at the declared URL. View diagnostics → Pass
  • Cryptographically verified build provenance (signed, bound to AdesiaHQ/bangermap-integrations). View diagnostics → Pass
  • Clear OSI-approved license (MIT).Pass
  • Actively maintained (last published 69 days ago).Pass
  • Disclosure check failed: no security disclosure policy was found in the source repository. See how to fix → Fail
Schema Quality & AI Usability73
  • AI-judged instruction clarity (good).Pass
  • Tool/resource definitions use about 428 tokens (~107/item across 4 items; 4 tools + 0 resources), lean.Pass
  • Usage-examples check failed: none of the tools include examples. See how to fix → Fail
Stability & Change Management93
  • Stability observed for 28 of 30 days with no destabilising changes; credit accrues until the full window elapses.Partial
Tool Coverage87
  • 100% of tools have a non-trivial description (not blank, and not just the tool's name).Pass
  • 60% of tool parameters carry a description.Partial
Tool Safety100
  • No prompt-injection markers were found in the server instructions, tool names or descriptions we captured.Pass
  • We read all 4 captured tool definition(s), and no name or description among them implies an irreversible operation.Pass
  • An AI judge read all 4 captured unit(s) of tool text and found none that tries to manipulate the model reading it.Pass
Capabilities100
  • Implements a supported MCP spec version (2025-11-25); the latest is 2026-07-28.Pass
Changelog

Every change we have recorded for this component, newest first. Security-relevant changes are always shown. ▲ marks a change for the better, ▼ a change for the worse; unmarked changes are neutral.

  • 16 Oct 26 +1

    No change was recorded against any check on this day. Stability & Change Management went from 90 to 93. That category is still filling its 30-day observation window: 27 days of observed history at the previous scan, 28 at this one. The score rises as the window fills, whether or not the server changes.

  • 13 Oct 26 +1

    No change was recorded against any check on this day. Stability & Change Management went from 80 to 83. That category is still filling its 30-day observation window: 24 days of observed history at the previous scan, 25 at this one. The score rises as the window fills, whether or not the server changes.

  • 12 Oct 26 +12
    • Malware scan: unverified → pass ▲ security
    • Security disclosure: unverified → fail ▼ functional
    • Stability: pass → 0.80 functional
  • 11 Oct 26 −13
    • Malware scan: pass → unverified ▼ security
    • Stability: 0.90 → pass security
    • Security disclosure: fail → unverified ▼ functional
  • 8 Oct 26 −1

    No change was recorded against any check on this day. Stability & Change Management went from 97 to 90.

  • 3 Oct 26 +1

    No change was recorded against any check on this day. Stability & Change Management went from 90 to 93. That category is still filling its 30-day observation window: 27 days of observed history at the previous scan, 28 at this one. The score rises as the window fills, whether or not the server changes.

  • 30 Sept 26 +1

    No change was recorded against any check on this day. Stability & Change Management went from 80 to 83. That category is still filling its 30-day observation window: 24 days of observed history at the previous scan, 25 at this one. The score rises as the window fills, whether or not the server changes.

  • 28 Sept 26 −3
    • We updated how we score, so this day's move reflects our rubric, not a change to the server See what changed → functional
Diagnostics

Diagnostic detail from the automated scan of this channel: what the scanner observed at each step, so you can see exactly where a check passed or failed. It is informational only and never changes the trust score.

Captured 16 Oct 2026 · Analysed npm/bangermap-mcp@1.0.3

Provenance Verified

A signed build attestation was found and verified, binding this exact artifact to the source repository it claims to come from.

Result Verified
Ecosystem npm
Reason Verified
Discovered via Registry attestation endpoint
Source repo AdesiaHQ/bangermap-integrations
Certificate issuer https://token.actions.githubusercontent.com
Certificate SAN https://github.com/AdesiaHQ/bangermap-integrations/.github/workflows/publish.yml@refs/heads/main
Rekor log index 2369962139
Predicate type SLSA build provenance https://slsa.dev/provenance/v1
Subject digest sha512:d802c4c8efeb6372200b5f5b79d158645f53ffcbba8ef9b3f0a62491cc6bdcda27cf2bdfbcded4b9b45e454266b94109e13c23edfafb5194a08947c86

Background: How many MCP packages publish verified provenance →

Dependencies 92 packages
Packages resolved 92
Stale 31
Tree resolution Complete

Background: SBOMs and build attestations, explained →

MCP tools · 4 exposed · ~428 tokens

The tools this component advertises to a client, with an estimated token cost for each. Expand a tool to see its parameters and schema. The per-tool counts are indicative and are not scored directly; the schema's total context footprint is one signal in Schema Quality & AI Usability. A tool's description is untrusted text the model reads on every call, which is what makes this list a security surface and not just an inventory: how tool poisoning works →

Tool Tokens
channel_baseline ~92

Report what normal performance looks like for a YouTube channel, as the median views of its recent settled uploads, with subscriber count and upload cadence. Call this when the user asks whether a view count is good for a given channel, or needs a reference point before judging a video. Costs about 5 quota units.

NameTypeReqDescription
channelstringyesChannel URL, @handle, channel id, or any video URL

No output schema declared.

No examples provided.

compare_channels ~105

Scan several YouTube channels at once and return the strongest outliers across all of them, each measured against its own channel's baseline. Call this when the user wants to see what is working across a niche or a set of competitors rather than one channel. Costs about 5 quota units per channel.

NameTypeReqDescription
channelsstringyesChannel URLs, @handles or ids, separated by spaces, commas or newlines
depthstring––
limitinteger––

No output schema declared.

No examples provided.

find_outliers ~136

Rank a YouTube channel's recent uploads by how far each beat that channel's own baseline. Call this when the user wants to know which of a channel's videos overperformed, or wants proven ideas from a specific channel. Runs on the caller's own free YouTube Data API key. Costs about 5 quota units.

NameTypeReqDescription
channelstringyesChannel URL, @handle, channel id, or the URL of any video on the channel
depthstring–How many recent uploads to read: light 50, standard 100, deep 200
limitinteger–How many rows to return

No output schema declared.

No examples provided.

sweep_niche ~95

Find channels related to a seed channel through the channels it features, then rank the strongest outliers across all of them. Call this when the user wants to discover channels in a niche they do not already know, rather than analyse ones they named. Costs about 5 quota units per channel found.

NameTypeReqDescription
limitinteger––
max_channelsinteger––
seedstringyesThe channel to expand from

No output schema declared.

No examples provided.

Install

How do I install the Bangermap MCP server?

Bangermap runs locally as an npm package, launched with npx -y bangermap-mcp. Ready-made configuration for Claude, Cursor, VS Code, Codex and 5 more is on this page, copied from each client's own documentation.

npm · bangermap-mcp

# add to Claude Code
claude mcp add adesiahq-bangermap-mcp -- npx -y bangermap-mcp
Common questions

What is the Bangermap MCP server?

Bangermap is an MCP server listed in the public MCP registry as io.github.AdesiaHQ/bangermap-mcp. Find YouTube outliers, videos that beat their channel's own baseline, on your own free API key. This page covers its npm package (bangermap-mcp).

Is the Bangermap MCP server safe to use?

Bangermap scores 92 out of 100 on VerifyMCP. We found no known CVEs affecting it as of 16 October 2026. It declares no install or post-install scripts. Its build provenance is signed and verified. That is a record of what we were able to check automatically, not an endorsement. The category breakdown on this page shows every signal behind the number, including the ones we could not confirm.

What tools does the Bangermap MCP server expose?

Bangermap exposes 4 tools: find_outliers, channel_baseline, compare_channels, sweep_niche. Their descriptions and schemas cost roughly 428 tokens of context every time the server is loaded.

Is the Bangermap MCP server still maintained?

Bangermap is still listed as active in the MCP registry. We last reached this channel on 16 October 2026. Those dates come from our own scans of the registry and the channel itself, not from anything the publisher announced.

What licence is the Bangermap MCP server under?

Bangermap declares the MIT licence, which is OSI-approved. That covers the source only, and says nothing about the cost of any service it calls.