Video Frames
PYPI · MCP-VIDEO-FRAMES
MCP server that lets image-only models look at video: timecoded frames, measurable properties.
Available components
Last scanned (22 hours ago)
Scores higher than 70% of PyPI servers
Category Design and Media
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 Security50
- Malware scan not yet available for this package.Unverified
- No known CVEs affecting this package version or its production dependencies.Pass
- Runs hatchling.build at install time, a recognised build step with no custom scripting around it. View diagnostics → Pass
- 1 of 29 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 Azzy-H/mcp-video-frames). View diagnostics → Pass
- Clear OSI-approved license (MIT).Pass
- Actively maintained (last published 37 days ago).Pass
- Disclosure check failed: no security disclosure policy was found in the source repository. See how to fix → Fail
Schema Quality & AI Usability56
- AI-judged instruction clarity (good).Pass
- Context-footprint check failed: tool/resource definitions use about 531 tokens (~265/item across 2 items; 2 tools + 0 resources), over budget; trim descriptions and params. See how to fix → Fail
- Usage-examples check failed: none of the tools include examples. See how to fix → Fail
Stability & Change Management100
- No destabilizing schema changes in the last 30 days.Pass
Tool Coverage71
- 100% of tools have a non-trivial description (not blank, and not just the tool's name).Pass
- 0% of tool parameters carry a description.Fail
- Structured output schemas are declared (100% of tools); any adoption earns full credit.Pass
Tool Safety100
- No prompt-injection markers were found in the server instructions, tool names or descriptions we captured.Pass
- We read all 2 captured tool definition(s), and no name or description among them implies an irreversible operation.Pass
- An AI judge read all 3 captured unit(s) of tool text and found none that tries to manipulate the model reading it.Pass
Capabilities100
- Implements a current MCP spec version (2026-07-28).Pass
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.
- 29 Oct 26 −15
- Malware scan: pass → unverified ▼ security
- 28 Oct 26 0
- Stability: 0.97 → pass security
- 27 Oct 26 +1
No change was recorded against any check on this day. Stability & Change Management went from 93 to 97. That category is still filling its 30-day observation window: 28 days of observed history at the previous scan, 29 at this one. The score rises as the window fills, whether or not the server changes.
- 25 Oct 26 +1
No change was recorded against any check on this day. Stability & Change Management went from 87 to 90. That category is still filling its 30-day observation window: 26 days of observed history at the previous scan, 27 at this one. The score rises as the window fills, whether or not the server changes.
- 23 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.
- 21 Oct 26 +1
No change was recorded against any check on this day. Stability & Change Management went from 73 to 77. That category is still filling its 30-day observation window: 22 days of observed history at the previous scan, 23 at this one. The score rises as the window fills, whether or not the server changes.
- 18 Oct 26 +16
- Malware scan: unverified → pass ▲ security
- 17 Oct 26 −15
- Malware scan: pass → unverified ▼ security
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 4 Nov 2026 · Analysed pypi/mcp-video-frames@0.1.1
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 | pypi |
| Reason | Verified |
| Discovered via | Registry attestation endpoint |
| Source repo | Azzy-H/mcp-video-frames |
| Certificate issuer | https://token.actions.githubusercontent.com |
| Certificate SAN | https://github.com/Azzy-H/mcp-video-frames/.github/workflows/publish.yml@refs/tags/v0.1.1 |
| Rekor log index | 2981399316 |
| Predicate type | PyPI publish attestation https://docs.pypi.org/attestations/publish/v1 |
| Subject digest | sha256:a3b20296f81e75934139cd30c2516139564b76202333b9d8b4497437402f77db |
Background: How many MCP packages publish verified provenance →
Install scripts 1 script
| Hook | Tier | Command |
|---|---|---|
| build_backend | allowlisted | hatchling.build |
Background: Why install scripts are a supply-chain risk →
Dependencies 29 packages
| Packages resolved | 29 |
|---|---|
| No linked repository | 1 |
| Tree resolution | Complete |
Background: SBOMs and build attestations, explained →
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 →
video_info ~148
Metadata for a video. detail="basic" reads container headers only and returns immediately. detail="full" additionally scans the whole file for scene cuts, silence intervals and EBU R128 loudness; that scan is exhaustive and therefore slow on long files, but it is cached and reused. Use force=true to recompute. This tool returns no images, so the image limits do not apply to it, but your client's per-call time limit does: a full scan of a long video takes time proportional to its length, and may exceed the limit. Raise that limit if your client allows it.
| Name | Type | Req | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| detail | string | – | – |
| force | boolean | – | – |
| video | string | yes | – |
| Name | Type | Req | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| result | string | yes | – |
No examples provided.
view_frames ~270
Sample a video and return frames as images, each preceded by its timecode — the only thing tying an image to a moment. Set start == end to look at a single moment (returns a lossless PNG); the interval is ignored in that case. Range requests default to jpeg, which is about an order of magnitude smaller and fits far more frames in the same budget. Frames are cached by absolute timestamp, so overlapping ranges reuse work. max_frames defaults to 12; raising it up to the image limit trades away detail — lower max_edge or use format="jpeg" to afford more frames. All of these limits are set by whoever deployed this server, not by you. Server limits for this deployment: at most 20 images per call, each at most 10 MB, 40 MB per result. Frames are never silently dropped or resampled, so the interval you ask for is the interval you get. Requests past a limit fail with the numbers and concrete alternatives — the server never truncates a range or coarsens your interval.
| Name | Type | Req | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| end | – | – | – |
| format | – | – | – |
| interval | number | – | – |
| max_edge | integer | – | – |
| max_frames | – | – | – |
| quality | integer | – | – |
| start | number | – | – |
| video | string | yes | – |
| Name | Type | Req | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| result | array | yes | – |
No examples provided.
How do I install the Video Frames MCP server?
Video Frames runs locally as a PyPI package, launched with uvx mcp-video-frames. Ready-made configuration for Claude, Cursor, VS Code, Codex and 5 more is on this page, copied from each client's own documentation.
pypi · mcp-video-frames
claude mcp add azzy-h-mcp-video-frames -- uvx mcp-video-frames
What is the Video Frames MCP server?
Video Frames is an MCP server listed in the public MCP registry as io.github.Azzy-H/mcp-video-frames. MCP server that lets image-only models look at video: timecoded frames, measurable properties. This page covers its PyPI package (mcp-video-frames).
Is the Video Frames MCP server safe to use?
Video Frames scores 74 out of 100 on VerifyMCP. We found no known CVEs affecting it as of 4 November 2026. 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 Video Frames MCP server expose?
Video Frames exposes 2 tools: view_frames, video_info. Their descriptions and schemas cost roughly 418 tokens of context every time the server is loaded.
Is the Video Frames MCP server still maintained?
Video Frames is still listed as active in the MCP registry. We last reached this channel on 4 November 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 Video Frames MCP server under?
Video Frames declares the MIT licence, which is OSI-approved. That covers the source only, and says nothing about the cost of any service it calls.