Tool suggestion: MetadataRemover.ai — browser-local image metadata removal

Suggesting MetadataRemover.ai for the toolkit. I maintain the tool and have included its limitations below so the editors can assess it independently.

## URL

https://metadataremover.ai/

## Description

Free, open-source browser tool that removes EXIF, GPS, XMP, IPTC and AI-related metadata from JPG, PNG and WebP files. Processing happens locally, so files are not uploaded and no account is required. It can help journalists and researchers sanitize image copies before sharing them with colleagues, sources or the public.

## Cost

* [x] Free
* [ ] Partially Free
* [ ] Paid

## Level of difficulty

Beginner — select or drop images, review the detected metadata, then download cleaned copies.

## Requirements

A modern browser. No account, API key or installation is required.

## Limitations

- Supports JPG, PNG and WebP images; it does not currently clean video, audio, PDF or office files.
- Removing embedded metadata cannot remove information already stored by a platform or prevent a platform from making independent inferences.
- Investigators should keep original evidence files and verify cleaned exports before publication.

## Ethical Considerations

The tool is intended to reduce accidental disclosure of source, location, device and workflow information. It should not be presented as a way to defeat provenance systems or evade platform enforcement.

## Guides and articles

Privacy workflow: https://metadataremover.ai/guides/remove-gps-exif-before-sharing
AI metadata explainer: https://metadataremover.ai/ai-image-metadata

## Tool provider

Open-source project maintained by Leo Song. MIT-licensed source: https://github.com/songwenlei/metadataremover.ai

## Similar tools

ExifCleaner, mat2, ImagePipe and Metadata2Go cover adjacent metadata-cleaning or inspection workflows. MetadataRemover.ai differs by running in-browser without uploads or sign-up.

Disclosure: I maintain MetadataRemover.ai.

Review the MetadataRemover.ai homepage, guides, source repository, limitations, and similar tools listed in the issue, then inspect the toolkit's existing tool-entry structure. Done means the editors have independently assessed the suggestion and either added it consistently with comparable entries or documented why it was not accepted.

Written by the indexing model from the issue text.