Entscheidsuche MCP Server
Related Servers
Alternatives to Entscheidsuche MCP Server
No user-submitted related servers found.
Related Servers
- AlicenseAqualityAmaintenanceMCP server for searching Swiss court decisions from federal and cantonal courts via entscheidsuche.ch. Enables full-text search, law reference lookup, and filtering by canton, court level, and date without API keys.847 PyPI1MIT

entscheidsuche-mcpofficial
AlicenseNot gradedqualityBmaintenanceMCP server for Swiss court decisions, enabling full-text search and retrieval of published decisions from all Swiss federal and cantonal courts in German, French, and Italian.4MIT- AlicenseNot gradedqualityNot gradedmaintenanceProvides access to Swiss court decisions through the entscheidsuche.ch API, enabling search, retrieval, and analysis of legal documents across different cantons and courts using natural language queries.-
- AlicenseAqualityDmaintenanceMCP Server providing AI agents access to over 3 million US court decisions via CourtListener and EU legislation via EUR-Lex, with tools for searching cases, citations, judges, and court information.6MIT
- AlicenseAqualityAmaintenanceAn MCP server connecting AI models to the Swiss Federal Parliament via the Curia Vista OData API, enabling queries of motions, votes, members, sessions, and debate transcripts without authentication.733 PyPIMIT
- 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
TDQS
Scored across 3 tools
Each tool has a clearly distinct purpose: get_document retrieves specific document content, list_courts provides metadata about courts, and search_case_law performs searches across the database. There is no overlap in functionality, making tool selection straightforward for an agent.
All tool names follow a consistent verb_noun pattern (get_document, list_courts, search_case_law) with clear, descriptive verbs. There are no deviations in naming conventions, making the set predictable and easy to understand.
With only 3 tools, the server feels somewhat thin for a legal document search domain. While the tools cover core operations (retrieve, list, search), more comprehensive coverage might include tools for filtering, advanced search, or document metadata management, suggesting a borderline appropriateness.
The tools provide basic CRUD-like operations (get, list, search) for legal documents and courts, but there are notable gaps. For example, there is no tool for updating or deleting documents, managing user queries, or handling advanced search parameters, which could limit agent effectiveness in complex workflows.