
Frame Check
io.github.lluvr由 GitHub 账号 lluvr 发布v1.2.2更新于 Nov 7, 2026
Deterministic structural framing analysis for AI-generated documents; no LLM call of its own.
概览
本地 MCP 服务器,对文档做确定性的结构性框架分析,并将文档中的数字论断与一手数据源交叉核对。
- 可以做什么
- 分析文档的框架画像:五种分析视角中覆盖了哪些、遗漏了哪些及其密度
- 评估叙述声音、认知姿态以及论断中注明来源的比例
- 报告时间取向:基于历史数据、当前状况还是预测
- 按目录匹配具名框架模式,输出候选级信号与置信状态
- 在数据源有覆盖时,将数字论断与 SEC EDGAR、FRED、世界银行、Alpha Vantage 和 Wolfram Alpha 核对
- 可选附加 AI 叙述解读,并与确定性测量结果分开标注
- 适用场景
- 当你需要对文档框架获得可复现、每次一致的分析结果,而不是一次性的模型观点时适用;也适合核对报告或财报摘要中的数字是否与一手来源一致,或比较不同模型、不同草稿对同一问题的框架差异。
- 运行要求
- 以 Python 包 frame-check-mcp 在本地运行,用 pip 安装后通过其入口点启动,例如写入 Claude Desktop 配置。未声明任何认证、环境变量或请求头。来源核验会访问外部数据提供方;仅可选的 AI 叙述解读需要配置 API 密钥。
安装
在 SourceWeft 中
- 打开 控制台中的 Frame Check,将其添加到工作区。
- 为需要使用其工具的对话启用该服务。
Desktop only,通过 STDIO。 STDIO 服务会启动本地进程,因此需要 SourceWeft 桌面宿主。
其他 MCP 客户端
参照 仓库 中的启动说明。
README
Frame Check
[PyPI] [Python] [License] [Tests]
See what any document does not show you.
Frame Check is a deterministic structural framing analysis tool. It names which analytical perspectives a document takes, which it omits, and how it positions the reader, and it cross-checks the document's numeric claims against primary sources a language model can't reach (SEC EDGAR, FRED, World Bank, and others). It makes no LLM call of its own, so the same document always returns the same reading at no model cost.
Quickstart (MCP server)
The PyPI package frame-check-mcp is the Model Context Protocol
server. It runs locally and gives any MCP-compatible AI client
(Claude Desktop, Cursor, Cline, Continue.dev, etc.) deterministic
structural framing analysis as a tool.
Then point your MCP client at the installed entry point. For
Claude Desktop, add to claude_desktop_config.json:
Restart the client. Then in any conversation: "Can you frame-check
this document?" Full install + verification details in docs/MCP_SERVER.md.
Verifying the wheel (sigstore attestation)
Every published wheel ships with a sigstore build-provenance
attestation generated inside the GitHub Actions publish workflow
via OIDC. Adopters who want to verify the wheel was built from
this repository's CI (and not modified between the runner and
PyPI) can do so with the gh CLI:
A passing verification proves the wheel artifact's hash matches the one signed by the publish workflow run for the corresponding tag, with the workflow file path and git SHA recorded in the attestation. Verification is optional; security-conscious deployments and packaging mirrors may want it as part of their install pipeline.
What it does
Pass a document and Frame Check returns:
- A structural framing profile: which of five analytical perspectives (causes, risks, stakeholders, trends, uncertainty) the document covers, which it omits, and the density of each.
- Voice and epistemic posture: how the document positions the reader, and what share of claims are attributed to sources.
- Temporal orientation: whether the document grounds its conclusions in historical data, present state, or projections.
- Frame Vocabulary Standard candidate matches: named frame patterns whose rule-based signals fire on the text, each with identification cues and worked examples. Matches are candidate-level signals, not verified labels.
- Source-network verification: numeric claims checked against SEC EDGAR, FRED, World Bank, Alpha Vantage, and Wolfram Alpha where those providers have coverage.
- An optional AI narrative interpreting framing at prose level. Labelled distinctly so readers do not conflate language-model interpretation with deterministic measurement.
Approach
Structural measurement is the floor. Every framing claim the tool makes is computed from deterministic pattern matchers and always returns the same result for the same input. AI-assisted interpretation is available as enrichment where an API key is configured, but is labelled as such and never hidden behind the structural layer.
Verification is bounded. The tool only verifies numeric claims against providers with genuine coverage for the claim type, and it surfaces its own calibration results (precision, recall, F1 per provider) rather than asserting verdicts without evidence.
Named-pattern detection is a separate, beta layer from the structural profile. It surfaces candidate matches, under-detection markers, density caveats, and confidence states rather than confident labels, so you can see where the tool is unsure instead of trusting an overconfident verdict.
Calibration figures, honest limits, and the methodology behind them live in the methodology at frame.clarethium.com/corpus/methodology.
Why this and not just an LLM
An MCP-compatible AI client can already analyse a document by prompting an LLM. Frame Check earns its install footprint where the LLM falls short:
- Determinism. The structural layer returns the same numbers for the same input across runs, deploys, and model versions. An LLM asked "what frames does this document use" gives a different answer each time and a different answer per model. Reproducible analysis needs the deterministic shape; opinions can layer on top.
- Zero per-query cost. Frame Check's MCP server makes no LLM call server-side. The caller's agent does the prose interpretation if the user wants that. This means a frame-check on a 10,000-word document costs the user $0.00, not the $0.05 to $0.50 an LLM call would charge.
- Explicit absence. The frame-divergence block names what the document does not address by comparing matched frames against the Frame Vocabulary Standard catalog. An LLM asked "what's missing" hallucinates plausible-sounding gaps; Frame Check enumerates catalog entries that did not fire on the text and says so.
- Calibrated detection. The named-pattern layer is labelled beta
in the API responses (
engine_status: beta) and surfaces under-detection markers rather than confident labels. You get an honest "this is uncertain" instead of a confident guess. - Source verification. Numeric claims with provider coverage get cross-checked against SEC EDGAR / FRED / World Bank / REST Countries / Alpha Vantage / Wolfram Alpha at provider pricing tiers (zero or user-keyed). An LLM asked "is this number right" cannot fetch primary sources; Frame Check does.
Deterministic, source-grounded measurement is not work an LLM is suited to do. Frame Check provides that layer so the LLM can lean on it instead of being asked to do that work in-band.
Worked example
Same prompt, four frontier LLMs, four materially different framing
signatures.
data/worked_examples/four-llms-on-bitcoin-retirement-2026.md
runs Claude Haiku 4.5, GPT-5, Grok 4.1 Fast Reasoning, and Gemini 2.5
Flash against an investment question and surfaces the per-model
structural shape: voice, coverage, frame matches, sourcing rate. The
point in plain form: your AI is one framing choice among several, not
the framing.
Five more published examples live alongside it: framings of an LLM
response to a life-decision prompt, an AI-company founder essay, an
FOMC monetary-policy statement, and a Source-Network verification pass
on an LLM-summarised earnings release, plus a divergence walk-through
on Claude's Bitcoin retirement recommendation. See
data/worked_examples/ for the full set.
Documentation
Browse docs/README.md for reading paths organised
by intent (install + use, understand frame divergence, read the worked
examples). The full inventory:
docs/MCP_SERVER.md: MCP server reference (tools, resources, prompts)docs/COOKBOOK.md: five recipes for common adopter tasks (frame-check before agent commit, divergence at decision points, source-grounded verification, two-LLM comparison, custom FVS rule)docs/FRAME_DIVERGENCE_CONTRACT_v1.md: interface contract for the Frame Divergence emission shape (c1.0)data/frame_library/: 20-entry Frame Vocabulary Standard catalogdata/worked_examples/: published worked examples with multi-LLM comparisons + per-document Frame Check analysis (6 entries)- The methodology behind the Frame Vocabulary Standard is documented at frame.clarethium.com/corpus/methodology
- Frame Check introduction (blog): the four analysis layers, with examples of the output
Running tests
Or directly via pytest:
26 test files under tests/, ~30 seconds end-to-end. Includes 40 adversarial dispatcher test functions in tests/test_mcp_adversarial.py (parametrized into 63 tests at collection time), a per-module 80% coverage gate on the seven wheel-surface modules (scripts/check_per_module_coverage.py), the cookbook-recipe contract suite (tests/test_cookbook_recipes.py), and the genre-classifier + frame-divergence coverage.
License
Apache-2.0 for code; CC-BY-4.0 for the FVS library and worked examples
(see NOTICE for the per-directory enumeration).
Citation
If Frame Check is useful in your work, see .github/CITATION.cff for
the citable form. Frame Check is authored by Lovro Lucic.
Contributing
Sign-off-by-DCO required per .github/CONTRIBUTING.md. Governance per
.github/GOVERNANCE.md (BDFL model with named forcing functions for
canon-promotion decisions).
Issues
来源:README.md,提交 aa24cba
工具
0版本历史
2- v1.2.2最新Nov 7, 2026
- v1.2.1Nov 5, 2026
评分
已满足适用检查项的 50%
该评分衡量此收录条目的完整程度,依据注册中心条目、端点与公开来源计算得出。它不是对服务器本身的评价,也不表示服务器安全或当前可用:可连通性是带日期的检查结果,评分也不包含安装量或用户评价。
- 近 30 天内可连通25 分
请保持端点能够响应 MCP 握手;SourceWeft 每 30 天探测一次。
- 已声明认证方式10 分
请在注册中心条目中声明凭据请求头,或保持端点能够响应探测,以便判定其认证方式。
- 已列出工具15 分
请让服务器在无凭据时响应 tools/list,或发布可在沙箱中无凭据启动的软件包。
- 描述必需15 分
- 图标10 分
- 文档15 分
- 许可证10 分
其他 Check 集成
check.tattoo: tattoo size and placement guide
tattoo.check官方发布者
check.tattoo: tattoo size and placement guide 的托管 MCP 服务,由 check.tattoo 发布;无需登录;Streamable HTTP;5 个工具。
iva.pt — EU VAT check (VIES) and Portuguese VAT law
pt.iva官方发布者
在 VIES 中校验欧盟增值税号,并返回葡萄牙增值税法典(CIVA)与 RITI 条文,支持葡语和英语。

Dirtsmith Evidence Quote Check
由 GitHub 账号 throttler300 发布
一个本地 MCP 服务器,将助手的引用绑定到已准入的源文本并标注片段位置,可选拒绝哈希过期的引用。

HTTP Header Policy Check — HSTS, CSP & Frame Declarations
由 GitHub 账号 kriton-dev 发布
托管在 Apify 上的远程 MCP 服务器,让助手检查网站声明的七类 HTTP 安全响应头,且不返回原始头值。

VOOPA Render Check
由 GitHub 账号 Voopa-Corp 发布
对照创作要求审查已生成的视频,在再次付费渲染前建议是剪辑修改、重试一次还是更换方案。