Skip to main content
Glama

Related Servers

Alternatives to tw-law-mcp

No user-submitted related servers found.

    Related Servers

    • F
      license
      A
      quality
      F
      maintenance
      An MCP server that provides automated querying of Taiwan building regulations, integrating both legal articles and official interpretation letters from government databases.
      3
      11
      -
    • A
      license
      Not graded
      quality
      B
      maintenance
      This MCP server enables searching Korean construction standards (KDS/KCS), laws from the Ministry of Government Legislation, administrative rules and interpretations, and optionally local water/wastewater design manuals to generate grounded evidence packages for engineering answers.
      2
      MIT
    • A
      license
      A
      quality
      D
      maintenance
      MCP server for querying Taiwan's real estate transaction registry via web scraping of the Ministry of the Interior's official portal. Enables natural language queries for real estate sales, rentals, and pre-sale housing data.
      1
      1
      MIT
    • A
      license
      Not graded
      quality
      D
      maintenance
      一个优化过的台湾法规查询MCP服务器,提供高效的法规搜索、条文查询和关键字搜索功能,支持摘要模式减少token消耗。
      MIT
    • A
      license
      A
      quality
      D
      maintenance
      MCP server for searching and querying detailed housing listings in Taiwan, enabling AI to find properties with filters like city, district, room count, price, and age.
      2
      MIT
    • F
      license
      Not graded
      quality
      D
      maintenance
      This MCP server integrates South Korea's national law information, building registers from MOLIT, and KOSIS statistics for housing development research. It enables searching laws, retrieving building details, and accessing statistical data through natural language.
      -

    TDQS

    C2.7/5.0

    Scored across 39 tools

    Disambiguation2/5

    There is substantial overlap among the many run_*_acceptance tools (e.g., run_source_policy_acceptance vs run_source_coverage_acceptance) and among check_* routing tools, making it difficult to select the correct one without reading details. While descriptions clarify intent, the boundaries between acceptance, audit, and analysis tools are blurry.

    Naming Consistency4/5

    Names consistently follow a verb_noun snake_case pattern with predictable subpatterns like run_*_acceptance, check_*, and build_*. Minor deviations exist (e.g., run_audit_gates vs run_*_acceptance, get_fixture_baseline_status vs other get_* tools) but the overall style is coherent.

    Tool Count2/5

    With 39 tools, the surface is heavily overloaded. Many tools are internal acceptance/QA checks (run_*_acceptance, run_audit_gates) that are unlikely to be needed by end users, plus the core business tools, resulting in excessive cognitive load for an agent.

    Completeness4/5

    The tool set covers an end-to-end workflow: law snapshot/search/article retrieval, citation and claim verification, scenario routing, document parsing, correction normalization, HITL confirmations, audit gates, and acceptance validation. Minor gaps exist in management/write operations (e.g., updating law packs or jurisdiction entries), but these are not core to the apparent read/analysis-focused purpose.

    Maintenance

    ActivityActive
    ResponsivenessResponsive