Skip to main content
Glama
Data-Alchemy-Labs

proofread-mcp

by Data-Alchemy-Labs
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Remote

Related Servers

Alternatives to proofread-mcp

No user-submitted related servers found.

    Related Servers

    • legal-mcp

      jscottym
      F
      license
      Not graded
      quality
      D
      maintenance
      Enables US case law search, citation parsing, practice management via Clio, and federal court filings through PACER.
      -

    • legal-review-agent

      jack-nolan-dev
      A
      license
      A
      quality
      C
      maintenance
      Enables Claude Desktop and Claude Code users to get AI-powered legal risk classifications for small business decisions, returning structured GREEN/YELLOW/RED verdicts with statute citations and compliant alternatives.
      1
      MIT

    • Citation Safe

      andrewjgaber-commits
      F
      license
      Not graded
      quality
      B
      maintenance
      Deterministic legal citation verification for AI-generated legal briefs. Three-layer verification: CourtListener database lookup, quote-match against primary source, and LLM edge-case verification. Free tier available.
      -
    Deploy Server
    One endpoint for every MCP toolRayrun runs every MCP server behind one URL and holds the credentials. Each call is decided per client, tool, and argument, then recorded.ray.runAd

    TDQS

    A4.6/5.0

    Scored across 14 tools

    Disambiguation4/5

    Tools are mostly distinct: check_citations vs check_document differ by input type (text vs file), resolve_citation vs resolve_citations differ by count, and suggest_cases offers a different domain. The cluster of citation tools could be confused, but descriptions clearly separate prose checking, list resolution, single lookup, and Swiss suggestions. Brief CRUD and account tools are unambiguous.

    Naming Consistency4/5

    Most tools follow a verb_noun pattern (check_citations, resolve_citations, list_briefs, save_brief, render_report), with a few exceptions like 'coverage' (noun) and 'sign_up' (phrasal verb). The pattern is predictable and readable, with only minor deviations.

    Tool Count5/5

    14 tools is well within the ideal range for this domain. Each tool has a clear purpose: checking, resolving, saving, managing, reporting, and account setup. No redundancy or bloat; the count matches the feature set.

    Completeness4/5

    The tool set covers the full lifecycle: checking citations in text and files, resolving single and batch citations, suggesting Swiss cases, managing saved briefs (CRUD), generating reports, and handling account quotas. Minor gaps exist, like no direct tool to check statutes or regulations, but those are explicitly out of scope, so the surface is appropriately complete.

    Maintenance

    ActivityMaintained
    ResponsivenessNo issues

    Resources