| Ecosystem |
| 0 |
| 0 |
| Match Graph | 0 | 0 |
| Pricing | Paid | Free |
| Capabilities | 11 decomposed | 6 decomposed |
| Times Matched | 0 | 0 |
Performs reverse facial recognition by uploading a face image and matching it against a proprietary index of 900+ million publicly crawled images using deep convolutional neural network embeddings. The system extracts facial feature vectors from the query image and performs approximate nearest-neighbor search across indexed face embeddings to identify matching faces across the web, returning ranked results with confidence scores and source URLs.
Unique: Indexes 900+ million publicly crawled images with facial recognition embeddings, enabling web-scale reverse face search — significantly larger index than Google Images reverse search which focuses on exact image matching rather than facial similarity across different photos
vs alternatives: Broader coverage than Google Images reverse search (which requires exact image matches) and more specialized than general reverse image search tools, but smaller index than law enforcement facial recognition databases like NIST FRVT
Implements a multi-stage ranking pipeline that scores facial matches based on embedding distance, facial landmarks alignment, and contextual metadata (image quality, source domain authority). Results are ranked by confidence score (typically 0-100) with visual similarity indicators, allowing users to quickly identify high-confidence matches versus ambiguous results that may be false positives.
Unique: Multi-stage ranking combining embedding distance with facial landmark alignment and source metadata, rather than single-metric ranking — enables filtering of false positives from structurally similar faces
vs alternatives: More sophisticated than simple cosine-distance ranking used in basic facial recognition APIs, but less transparent than explainable AI approaches that highlight which facial features drove matches
Manages user registration, email/password authentication, subscription state, billing information, and account settings. Implements standard security practices: password hashing, session management, two-factor authentication (optional), and account recovery flows. Tracks user search history and removal request submissions within account.
Unique: Standard user account management with subscription and billing integration, similar to most SaaS products — no unique architectural differentiation
vs alternatives: Typical SaaS authentication and account management; no significant differentiation vs other subscription services
Provides a credit-based search quota system where each facial search query consumes a fixed number of credits (typically 1-5 credits per search depending on subscription tier). Users receive monthly credit allocations tied to subscription level, with the ability to purchase additional credits. The system tracks credit consumption per search and enforces rate limiting to prevent abuse.
Unique: Implements a credit-based consumption model rather than unlimited searches or per-search micropayments, creating predictable monthly costs while incentivizing selective search behavior
vs alternatives: More transparent than hidden rate limits but less flexible than pay-per-search models; similar to cloud API credit systems (AWS, Google Cloud) but applied to consumer privacy tool
For each facial match detected, the system extracts and returns the source URL, page title, domain metadata, and thumbnail preview of the matched image. The system crawls page metadata to provide context about where the image appears (e.g., social media profile, news article, e-commerce listing) without requiring users to manually visit each URL.
Unique: Provides direct source URLs and page context for each match rather than just showing similar images, enabling actionable removal requests — most reverse image search tools show similar images but not source attribution
vs alternatives: More actionable than Google Images reverse search which shows visually similar images but not necessarily the original source; similar to TinEye's URL extraction but applied to facial matches rather than exact image matches
Provides an integrated workflow for users to submit removal requests directly to website owners for images containing their face. The system generates templated removal request emails with image details, source URL, and legal basis (GDPR, CCPA, or general privacy concerns), and tracks removal request status. Some integrations with major platforms (social media, search engines) enable automated removal submission.
Unique: Integrates removal request generation and tracking within the search results workflow, with templated legal basis options (GDPR/CCPA) — most reverse image search tools stop at showing results without removal workflow integration
vs alternatives: More comprehensive than basic URL extraction because it enables action; less effective than hiring a legal service for formal removal requests, but more accessible and affordable for individual users
Implements a multi-tier subscription model (Free, Premium, Professional) with feature gating where higher tiers unlock additional capabilities: monthly search credits, removal request submissions, advanced filtering options, and API access. The system enforces tier-based rate limits and feature availability at the application level.
Unique: Implements strict feature gating by subscription tier with monthly credit allocation, rather than unlimited usage or simple freemium model — creates predictable revenue but limits accessibility
vs alternatives: More sophisticated than simple paid/free split, but less flexible than usage-based pricing models that charge per search without monthly commitments
Handles user-uploaded facial images with preprocessing pipeline: validates file format (JPEG, PNG), detects faces using multi-task cascaded CNN (MTCNN) or similar detector, extracts facial regions, performs quality checks (resolution, blur, lighting), and normalizes images for embedding extraction. Rejects images with no detectable faces or quality issues below threshold.
Unique: Implements multi-stage preprocessing with face detection and quality validation before embedding extraction, rather than directly processing raw uploads — prevents poor-quality searches and reduces false positives
vs alternatives: More robust than simple image upload without validation, but adds latency compared to direct embedding extraction; similar to preprocessing in computer vision pipelines but applied to consumer privacy tool
+3 more capabilities
Implements a Model Context Protocol server that bridges Perplexity's real-time search API with LLM applications, enabling structured queries that return synthesized answers with source citations. The MCP server translates tool-call requests into Perplexity API calls, handles response parsing, and returns results in a format compatible with Claude, LLaMA, and other MCP-aware LLMs. Uses JSON-RPC 2.0 message framing over stdio/HTTP transports to maintain stateless request-response semantics.
Unique: Exposes Perplexity's proprietary AI-synthesized search as a standardized MCP tool, allowing any MCP-compatible LLM to access real-time web answers without direct API integration — the MCP abstraction layer decouples Perplexity's API contract from the LLM client
vs alternatives: Simpler than building custom Perplexity integrations for each LLM framework because MCP standardizes the tool interface; more current than retrieval-augmented generation with static embeddings because it queries live web data
Registers Perplexity search as a callable tool within the MCP ecosystem by defining a JSON schema that describes input parameters, output format, and tool metadata. The server implements the MCP tools/list and tools/call RPC methods, allowing LLM clients to discover available tools, validate inputs against the schema, and invoke search with type-safe parameters. Uses JSON Schema Draft 7 for parameter validation and supports optional tool hints for LLM routing.
Unique: Implements MCP's standardized tool registration pattern rather than custom function-calling APIs, enabling any MCP-aware LLM to invoke Perplexity without client-specific adapters — the schema-driven approach decouples tool definition from LLM implementation details
vs alternatives: More portable than OpenAI function calling because MCP is LLM-agnostic; more discoverable than hardcoded tool lists because schema-based registration allows dynamic tool enumeration
PimEyes scores higher at 44/100 vs Perplexity at 40/100. PimEyes leads on adoption and quality, while Perplexity is stronger on ecosystem. However, Perplexity offers a free tier which may be better for getting started.
Need something different?
Search the match graph →© 2026 Unfragile. Stronger through disorder.
Implements a stateless MCP server that communicates via JSON-RPC 2.0 messages over stdio (for local integration) or HTTP (for remote access). Each request is independently routed to the appropriate handler (search, tool listing, etc.) without maintaining session state or connection context. The server uses a simple message dispatcher pattern to map RPC method names to handler functions, enabling lightweight deployment as a subprocess or containerized service.
Unique: Uses MCP's standard JSON-RPC 2.0 message framing with dual transport support (stdio and HTTP), allowing the same server code to run as a subprocess or remote service without transport-specific branching — the abstraction is at the message handler level, not the transport layer
vs alternatives: Simpler than REST APIs because JSON-RPC 2.0 provides standardized request/response semantics; more flexible than gRPC because it works over stdio and HTTP without code generation
Manages Perplexity API authentication by accepting an API key at server initialization and injecting it into all outbound Perplexity API requests via HTTP headers. The server handles credential validation (checking for missing or malformed keys) and propagates authentication errors back to the MCP client. Uses environment variables or configuration files to avoid hardcoding secrets in code.
Unique: Centralizes Perplexity API authentication at the MCP server level rather than requiring each client to manage credentials, reducing the attack surface by keeping API keys in a single process — the server acts as a credential broker between LLM clients and Perplexity
vs alternatives: More secure than embedding API keys in client code because credentials are isolated to the server process; simpler than OAuth because Perplexity uses API key authentication
Parses Perplexity API responses to extract synthesized answer text, source URLs, and citation metadata. The parser maps Perplexity's response schema (which may include nested citations, confidence scores, and related queries) into a normalized output format suitable for MCP clients. Handles edge cases like missing citations, malformed URLs, and partial responses from Perplexity.
Unique: Abstracts Perplexity's response schema behind a normalized output format, allowing MCP clients to remain agnostic to Perplexity API changes — the parser acts as a schema adapter layer
vs alternatives: More maintainable than raw API responses because schema changes are handled in one place; more transparent than black-box search because citations are explicitly extracted and returned
Implements error handling for Perplexity API failures (rate limits, timeouts, invalid responses) by catching exceptions, mapping them to MCP error codes, and returning structured error responses to the client. The server implements retry logic with exponential backoff for transient failures and provides fallback responses when Perplexity is unavailable. Error messages include diagnostic information (HTTP status, error code, retry-after headers) to help clients decide whether to retry.
Unique: Implements MCP-compliant error responses with diagnostic metadata (retry-after, error codes) rather than raw API errors, allowing clients to make informed retry decisions — the error abstraction layer decouples Perplexity's error semantics from MCP clients
vs alternatives: More resilient than direct API calls because retry logic is built-in; more informative than generic error messages because diagnostic metadata is included