Skip to main content
Glama
Vaquill-AI

courtlistener-mcp

by Vaquill-AI
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Hybrid

Related Servers

Alternatives to courtlistener-mcp

No user-submitted related servers found.

    Related Servers

    • CourtListener MCP Server

      UPSD1
      F
      license
      Not graded
      quality
      D
      maintenance
      A comprehensive Model Context Protocol (MCP) server for accessing CourtListener's legal database. Provides Claude Desktop with powerful legal research capabilities including court opinions, case dockets, judge profiles, and comprehensive legal analysis.
      1
      -

    • Legal Research Agent

      jcpask
      A
      license
      Not graded
      quality
      B
      maintenance
      MCP server for legal research that enables searching US case law via CourtListener, retrieving full opinion text, and looking up legal definitions from Cornell's Wex. Students can connect via a remote connector in Claude.ai to cite real, free legal sources.
      1
      MIT

    • mcp-courtwatch

      haksanlulz
      A
      license
      A
      quality
      A
      maintenance
      MCP server for free U.S. case-law and court-docket search via CourtListener, providing tools for opinion search, docket lookup, citation verification, and more.
      10
      5 npm
      1
      MIT

    • legal-mcp

      MCPServings
      A
      license
      Not graded
      quality
      D
      maintenance
      A remotely callable MCP server for US legal research that provides tools to search, retrieve, and analyze US case law from the CourtListener API, enabling agents to build evidence packs from primary sources without generating legal content.
      MIT
    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

    A3.5/5.0

    Scored across 34 tools

    Disambiguation5/5

    Each tool has a distinct and well-described purpose. Citation tools cover different operations (lookup, batch, verify, parse, extract, enhanced lookup). eCFR tools each handle a separate task (list titles, get versions, structure, ancestry, search, counts, etc.). General CourtListener tools are clearly separated by resource and action (search vs get, opinions vs dockets vs audio vs people). No two tools appear to overlap in functionality.

    Naming Consistency4/5

    Tools are grouped with clear prefixes: 'citation_' for citation tools, 'ecfr_' for eCFR tools, and unprefixed verb+noun for general tools (e.g., get_court, search_opinions). Within each group, naming follows a consistent verb_noun pattern. The only minor inconsistency is the lack of a common prefix for general tools, but this is acceptable given the distinct functional areas.

    Tool Count2/5

    With 34 tools, the count exceeds the recommended range for a well-scoped server (3-15). While the server covers three broad legal domains (citations, eCFR, CourtListener), the tool surface is quite large and could potentially be split into separate servers for better focus. Many tools are very granular, especially for eCFR search counts and hierarchies.

    Completeness4/5

    The tool set covers the major operations for legal research: citation handling (lookup, batch, parsing, validation, extraction), eCFR retrieval and search (titles, versions, structure, ancestry, corrections, full-text search with counts), and CourtListener data access (search and get for opinions, dockets, audio, people, courts, RECAP documents). Minor gaps might include advanced filtering or sorting options, but overall the surface is comprehensive for the intended use.

    Maintenance

    ActivityMaintained
    ResponsivenessUnresponsive

    Resources