pk-eli-mcp
Related Servers
Alternatives to pk-eli-mcp
No user-submitted related servers found.
Related Servers
- AlicenseAqualityBmaintenanceMCP server for U.S. federal law that enables searching the U.S. Code, CFR, Federal Register, case law, and bills, with citation verification against primary sources to prevent hallucinations.11MIT
- AlicenseAqualityCmaintenanceAn MCP server providing AI assistants access to Canadian case law and legislation metadata from CanLII across all jurisdictions, supporting search and citation relationships.713 npm6MIT
- AlicenseAqualityBmaintenanceAn MCP server for the CourtMesh public API that enables AI clients to search and analyze Indian court case law, covering over 310 million case records from the Supreme Court, High Courts, District Courts, and tribunals.121MIT
- AlicenseNot gradedqualityBmaintenanceMCP server for Azerbaijan's official legal-acts database (e-qanun.az), enabling search, metadata retrieval, and full-text access to legislative and judicial documents.MIT
- AlicenseNot gradedqualityCmaintenanceMCP server to search and retrieve passages from a corpus of 7,872 classical Islamic books via the Sahifah API, with full citations and mu'tabar filtering.22 npmMIT
- AlicenseAqualityCmaintenanceEnables MCP-compatible AI agents to run structured searches over India's court judgments, tribunal matters, and legislation directly from Hugging Face parquet files, with automatic license attribution.108Apache 2.0
TDQS
Scored across 6 tools
Each tool maps to a distinct operation: statute search, statute retrieval, case search, case retrieval, coverage disclosure, and citation verification. The search/get pairs are clearly separated by corpus, and pk_verify_citations has a specialized purpose that does not overlap with the plain search tools.
Most tools follow a pk_ + verb_noun pattern such as pk_search_laws and pk_get_decision, but pk_case_search reverses the order and pk_coverage is a bare noun rather than a verb phrase. The pk_ prefix provides some consistency, but the naming conventions are mixed overall.
Six tools is well-scoped for a legal research connector: two search/retrieve pairs cover the two corpora, plus coverage and citation verification add necessary meta-capabilities. Each tool earns its place and none feel redundant.
The set covers search and retrieval for both federal statutes and Supreme Court judgments, plus citation verification and explicit gap disclosure, which is strong for a read-only legal corpus. The main limitation is that large statutes are truncated with no continuation mechanism, and case retrieval relies on row index or registry citation rather than broader citation formats.