eu-ai-act-mcp
Related Servers
Alternatives to eu-ai-act-mcp
No user-submitted related servers found.
Related Servers
- AlicenseAqualityDmaintenanceMCP server for EU AI Act compliance, providing risk classification of AI features and Article 50 transparency notices.232 PyPI1Apache 2.0
- AlicenseAqualityCmaintenanceAn MCP server for AI economy infrastructure with built-in EU AI Act compliance, supporting risk management, transparency, and bias detection.10MIT
- AlicenseNot gradedqualityDmaintenanceMCP server for EU AI Act compliance analysis — classify any AI system or workflow against Regulation (EU) 2024/1689, updated with AI Omnibus 2026.MIT
- AlicenseNot gradedqualityAmaintenanceAn MCP server that provides tools for deterministic EU AI Act risk classification and documentation generation, enabling human-in-the-loop AI system assessments inside Claude Code.2MIT
- AlicenseAqualityCmaintenanceEU AI Act Compliance - MCP server providing AI-powered tools and automation by MEOK AI Labs116 npm99 PyPI1MIT
- AlicenseAqualityDmaintenanceMCP server for querying compliance regulations including GDPR, EU AI Act, and CCPA through natural language questions, keyword search, and compliance checks.63 npmMIT
TDQS
Scored across 10 tools
Tools mostly target distinct compliance tasks, but euaiact_classify_system and euaiact_assess_system overlap in risk classification: both can classify a system, differing in input format and breadth. The descriptions try to clarify (e.g., cross-referencing the Art 6(3) exception tool), but an agent may still hesitate between them.
All tool names use the consistent euaiact_ prefix and snake_case with a verb_noun structure (check, get, assess, calculate, classify, answer). The one noun-phrase exception (euaiact_annex_iv_checklist) still fits the overall pattern.
10 tools is well-scoped for an EU AI Act compliance server: each covers a distinct aspect (classification, obligations, penalties, deadlines, GPAI, Annex IV, exception, FAQ, article lookup, system assessment). No obvious bloat or thinness.
The surface covers core regulatory workflows, but gaps remain: get_obligations only addresses providers and deployers, leaving importers/distributors/authorized representatives uncovered, and there is no dedicated tool for incident reporting or conformity assessment steps (though get_article can retrieve them). Overall strong but not exhaustive.