A
licenseA
qualityB
maintenanceSearches Lithuanian legislation by title and fetches full text from the Register of Legal Acts (TAR) via the data.gov.lt open-data API, with verifiable citations.
4
105 PyPI
Apache 2.0
TAAP MCP
by irmastnt
Related Servers
Alternatives to TAAP MCP
No user-submitted related servers found.
Related Servers
- AlicenseNot gradedqualityFmaintenanceProvides search, retrieval, and validation of Lithuanian statutes and provisions, including EU law cross-references, enabling legal research and compliance checks through natural language.53 npm1Apache 2.0
- AlicenseNot gradedqualityFmaintenanceEnables querying Estonian legislation from Riigi Teataja, including full-text search across 1,602 statutes and 63,624 provisions, with EU law integration and citation validation.47 npmApache 2.0
- AlicenseAqualityBmaintenanceEnables AI-powered legal research and analysis of Polish legal acts from the Sejm API. Provides comprehensive search, document retrieval, metadata analysis, and content access for legal documents from Dziennik Ustaw and Monitor Polski.1323MIT
- AlicenseNot gradedqualityFmaintenanceEnables querying Portuguese legislation, including statutes, provisions, and EU law implementations, with tools for search, citation validation, and currency checks.54 npmApache 2.0
- AlicenseAqualityBmaintenanceProvides access to Danish legislation from Retsinformation.dk, enabling retrieval of act metadata, full text, and recent changes with verifiable citations.494 PyPIApache 2.0
TDQS
A3.6/5.0
Scored across 20 tools
Disambiguation4/5
Most tools target distinct resource/action pairs, but there is some overlap among text and structure retrieval tools: lt_get_text, lt_get_edition_text, lt_get_provisions, lt_get_provision, and lt_get_definitions all deal with act content and could be briefly confused. The detailed descriptions generally resolve the boundaries, and reference tools lt_resolve_reference and lt_check_document_references are distinguishable by scope.
Naming Consistency4/5
All tools use a consistent lt_ prefix and snake_case, with mostly verb_noun patterns such as lt_get_act, lt_search_in_act, and lt_list_amendments. The main deviations are noun-style names lt_coverage and lt_health, which are minor but slightly break the otherwise predictable convention.
Tool Count4/5
At 20 tools this is somewhat above the ideal compact range, but the legal-research domain legitimately requires separate operations for acts, provisions, editions, amendments, attachments, court rulings, references, and health/coverage checks. No tool appears clearly redundant or filler, so the set is slightly heavy but reasonably scoped.
Completeness4/5
The surface covers core legal retrieval and lifecycle needs: search, act metadata, full text, provision structure, editions, diffs, amendments, attachments, court rulings, citation checks, and connector coverage/health. A notable possible gap is cross-act full-text search, since lt_search appears title-based and lt_search_in_act is limited to a single act, but most workflows are well supported.