legalize-kr MCP
Related Servers
Alternatives to legalize-kr MCP
No user-submitted related servers found.
Related Servers
- AlicenseNot gradedqualityAmaintenanceProvides tools for querying Korean laws, precedents, administrative rules, and ordinances via GitHub REST API, enabling natural language access to legal data.11Apache 2.0
- AlicenseAqualityBmaintenanceEnables natural language search and retrieval of Korean laws, precedents, administrative rules, and legal terms, with deep legal chain analysis and full-text access. Supports stdio and streamable-http transports for local and remote deployment.10MIT
- -licenseNot gradedqualityNot gradedmaintenanceEnables searching and retrieving Korean legal information including laws, court precedents, legal interpretations, and local ordinances from the Korean National Law Information Center API with intelligent search ranking.-
- AlicenseNot gradedqualityDmaintenanceEnables searching and retrieving Korean statutes, precedents, and constitutional court decisions via MCP, using the National Law Information Center API.4,664 npm1MIT
- FlicenseAqualityBmaintenanceEnables AI systems to search, retrieve, and analyze Korean legal information from the National Law Information API (law.go.kr), including laws, administrative rules, English translations, and law-ordinance linkages.262-
- AlicenseNot gradedqualityBmaintenanceEnables AI assistants to search and retrieve Korean laws, regulations, administrative rules, legal interpretations, and precedents via official APIs for legal review workflows.1MIT
TDQS
Scored across 6 tools
Each tool targets a distinct operation: reading current files, listing law directories, diffing files, searching, viewing git history, and retrieving historical versions. The only slight overlap between kr_read_file and kr_file_at_date is clearly differentiated by temporal focus.
All tools share the 'kr_' prefix, and most follow a verb_noun pattern (read_file, list_laws, git_log, file_at_date). However, kr_diff and kr_search are verb-only, creating a minor inconsistency in naming style.
With 6 tools, the set is well-scoped for a legal document browsing server. Each tool serves a clear purpose without unnecessary redundancy, fitting comfortably within the ideal 3-15 range.
The server covers core read-only workflows: discovering laws, reading current and historical content, searching, diffing, and viewing git history. A notable gap is the lack of a tool to list individual files within a law directory, which prevents agents from enumerating files without guessing.