Skip to main content
Glama

Related Servers

Alternatives to lu-eli-mcp

No user-submitted related servers found.

    Related Servers

    TDQS

    A3.9/5.0

    Scored across 3 tools

    Disambiguation5/5

    Each tool has a clearly distinct purpose: fetching metadata, fetching verbatim text, and declaring coverage/gaps. There is no overlap or ambiguity between them, so an agent can easily select the right tool for the task.

    Naming Consistency4/5

    All tools share the 'lu_' prefix, and two use the verb_noun pattern (get_act, get_text). However, 'lu_coverage' uses a noun directly rather than a verb, creating a minor deviation. The pattern is still readable and predictable overall.

    Tool Count4/5

    At 3 tools, the set is small but well-scoped for a read-only Luxembourg legislation connector. Each tool fills a necessary role, though a search/browse tool could be expected; the coverage tool partially compensates by documenting gaps.

    Completeness4/5

    The connector covers core operations: fetching metadata and full text, plus an explicit gaps/coverage tool to prevent false negatives. Missing a search or listing capability is a minor gap, but the coverage tool's fallbacks mitigate this.

    Maintenance

    ActivityMaintained
    ResponsivenessNo issues