Skip to main content
Glama
aydincan

Türk Hukuku İçtihat MCP

by aydincan
OverviewSchemaRelated ServersScoreDiscussions
Python
Remote

Server Quality Checklist

75%
Profile completionA complete profile improves this server's visibility in search results.

  • Latest release: v0.1.0

  • Disambiguation5/5

    The two tools have clearly distinct purposes: 'ictihat_ara' searches for precedents and returns identifiers, while 'karar_getir' retrieves the full text using those identifiers. There is no overlap or ambiguity.

    Naming Consistency5/5

    Both tool names follow a consistent Turkish pattern of noun_verb ('karar_getir' and 'ictihat_ara'), using underscores and clear, descriptive terms.

    Tool Count4/5

    With only two tools, the set is minimal but appropriately scoped for the core functionality of searching and retrieving full-text decisions. It is slightly below the typical range but still reasonable.

    Completeness5/5

    The tools cover the essential lifecycle of legal precedent retrieval: search with filtering and pagination, then get full text. There are no obvious gaps for the stated purpose.

  • Average 4.6/5 across 2 of 2 tools scored.

    See the Tool Scores section below for per-tool breakdowns.

    • 0 of 1 community issues answered or closed in the last 6 months
    • 8 commits in the last 12 weeks
    • No stable releases found
    • No critical vulnerability alerts
    • No high-severity vulnerability alerts
    • No code scanning findings
    • CI status not available

  • This repository is licensed under MIT License.

  • This repository includes a README.md file.

  • No tool usage detected in the last 30 days. Usage tracking helps demonstrate server value.

    Tip: use the "Try in Browser" feature on the server page to seed initial usage.

  • This repository includes a glama.json configuration file.

  • If you are the author, simply .

    If the server belongs to an organization, first add glama.json to the root of your repository:

    {
  "$schema": "https://glama.ai/mcp/schemas/server.json",
  "maintainers": [
    "your-github-username"
  ]
}

    Then . Browse examples.

  • Add related servers to improve discoverability.

How to sync the server with GitHub?

Servers are automatically synced at least once per day, but you can also sync manually at any time to instantly update the server profile.

To manually sync the server, click the "Sync Server" button in the MCP server admin interface.

How is the quality score calculated?

The overall quality score combines two components: Tool Definition Quality (70%) and Server Coherence (30%).

Tool Definition Quality measures how well each tool describes itself to AI agents. Every tool is scored 1–5 across six dimensions: Purpose Clarity (25%), Usage Guidelines (20%), Behavioral Transparency (20%), Parameter Semantics (15%), Conciseness & Structure (10%), and Contextual Completeness (10%). The server-level definition quality score is calculated as 60% mean TDQS + 40% minimum TDQS, so a single poorly described tool pulls the score down.

Server Coherence evaluates how well the tools work together as a set, scoring four dimensions equally: Disambiguation (can agents tell tools apart?), Naming Consistency, Tool Count Appropriateness, and Completeness (are there gaps in the tool surface?).

Tiers are derived from the overall score: A (≥3.5), B (≥3.0), C (≥2.0), D (≥1.0), F (<1.0). B and above is considered passing.

Tool Scores

  • Behavior4/5

    Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

    With no annotations, the description fully discloses the return content (summary, reasoning, verdict) and warns against modifying data. No side effects discussed but for a read-only tool this is sufficient.

    Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

    Conciseness5/5

    Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

    Two concise sentences: first defines purpose, second explains return and constraints. Every sentence adds value without redundancy.

    Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

    Completeness4/5

    Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

    Without output schema or annotations, the description adequately covers purpose, parameters, and behavior. Lacks error handling but acceptable for a retrieval tool.

    Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

    Parameters4/5

    Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

    Given 0% schema description coverage, the description adds meaning by explaining that mahkeme must match the search value and provides mapping to data sources, and karar_id comes from search results.

    Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

    Purpose5/5

    Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

    The description clearly states it retrieves the official full text of a decision using id and court, and distinguishes from the sibling tool 'ictihat_ara' which is for searching.

    Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

    Usage Guidelines4/5

    Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

    It specifies when to use (after ictihat_ara result) and provides constraints (do not modify case numbers, court must match). It lacks explicit when-not-to-use instructions.

    Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.

  • Behavior4/5

    Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

    No annotations, but the description discloses that the tool returns structured data (künye, atıf, id) and explains the mahkeme parameter options and defaults. It does not mention limitations or error conditions, but for a search tool this is adequate.

    Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

    Conciseness5/5

    Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

    Three concise sentences that front-load purpose and provide essential usage details without redundancy. Every sentence adds value.

    Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

    Completeness5/5

    Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

    Given no output schema, the description explains the return structure (künye, atıf, id) and how to use them. It covers all parameters and usage context. Complete for a search tool with one sibling.

    Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

    Parameters4/5

    Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

    Schema provides no descriptions (0% coverage). The description explains the meaning of mahkeme (three court types), adet (max results 1-50), sayfa (pagination starting at 1), and implicitly ifade (search term). It adds value beyond the bare schema.

    Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

    Purpose5/5

    Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

    The description clearly states it searches for Turkish court decisions and returns structural citation details and an ID. It differentiates from sibling tool karar_getir by specifying its role (search vs full text).

    Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

    Usage Guidelines5/5

    Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

    Explicit instructions: call before citing a decision, use the returned atif string exactly, and pass the id and mahkeme to karar_getir for full text. This provides clear when-to-use and how-to-use guidance.

    Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.

GitHub Badge

Glama performs regular codebase and documentation scans to:

  • Confirm that the MCP server is working as expected.
  • Confirm that there are no obvious security issues.
  • Evaluate tool definition quality.

Our badge communicates server capabilities, safety, and installation instructions.

Card Badge

turk-hukuku-ictihat-mcp MCP server

Copy to your README.md:

Score Badge

turk-hukuku-ictihat-mcp MCP server

Copy to your README.md:

Latest Blog Posts

MCP directory API

We provide all the information about MCP servers via our MCP API.

curl -X GET 'https://glama.ai/api/mcp/v1/servers/aydincan/turk-hukuku-ictihat-mcp'

If you have feedback or need assistance with the MCP directory API, please join our Discord server