Skip to main content
Glama
wolfgangihloff

Rechtsinformationen Bund DE MCP Server

by wolfgangihloff
OverviewSchemaRelated ServersScoreDiscussions
JavaScript
Remote

intelligente_rechtssuche

Search German federal legislation and case law with intelligent query translation and legal term correction. Access official statutes, amendments, and court decisions from authoritative government sources.

Instructions

🧠 PRIMARY TOOL ⭐ ALWAYS USE THIS FIRST for ANY German legal question ⭐

What this tool searches: • Full-text search across rechtsinformationen.bund.de • Both legislation (Gesetze) AND case law (Rechtsprechung) • Intelligent query enhancement with misconception correction

⚠️ DATABASE COVERAGE LIMITATIONS: • Grundgesetz (GG): NOT in database - only laws referencing GG are available • SGB I-VIII: NOT in database - SGB IX-XIV available, earlier books missing • Historic laws: Limited coverage, focus on current legislation post-2000 • Amendments: Newer amendment laws well-covered, older may be missing • If a law is not found, it may not be in the testphase database yet

Intelligent Features (Automatic): ✓ English → German translation (e.g., "employee rights" → "Arbeitnehmerrechte") ✓ Misconception correction (e.g., "Überprüfungsantrag" → "Widerspruch") ✓ Legal reference extraction (e.g., detects "§ 15 BEEG" patterns) ✓ Multiple search term execution in parallel ✓ Result prioritization and deduplication

Data Model Understanding (CRITICAL for answering questions): Results follow FRBR model with three levels:

  1. Work (Abstract): The law as intellectual creation

  2. Expression (Version): Specific publication with metadata

  3. Manifestation (Format): HTML links for reading, JSON-LD for metadata

Metadata Available in Search Results: • Immediately available (no follow-up needed):

  • legislationDate - When the law was passed/enacted

  • datePublished - When published in Federal Law Gazette (BGBl)

  • name - Full law title

  • abbreviation - Official abbreviation (BGB, StGB, etc.)

• Requires follow-up call (use gesetz_per_eli_abrufen):

  • temporalCoverage - Date range when law is/was in force

  • inForce - Current validity status (boolean)

  • Full text content and structure

Results contain: • HTML links (Manifestation): [Law Name] for users to read • Basic metadata (Expression): Legislation date, published date immediately visible • Detailed metadata: Use gesetz_per_eli_abrufen for inForce status and temporal coverage

Example Use Cases: • "When was BGB enacted?" → Check legislationDate in results (immediate) • "When was BGB published?" → Check datePublished in results (immediate) • "Is SGB IX still valid?" → Use gesetz_per_eli_abrufen for inForce status (follow-up) • "Show me § 242 StGB" → Use HTML link for law text (immediate)

What this tool does NOT do: ✗ Does NOT perform true semantic search with ML embeddings ✗ Does NOT generate semantically similar terms (YOU must provide variations) ✗ Does NOT try multiple query phrasings (YOU must search with different terms) ✗ Does NOT explore related concepts automatically (YOU need multiple searches) ✗ Uses keyword matching + Fuse.js fuzzy search (not neural embeddings)

AI Agent Responsibilities: As the calling agent, YOU must:

  1. Provide multiple query variations (synonyms, related terms, different phrasings)

  2. Search for law abbreviations separately (BEEG, BGB, SGB, etc.)

  3. Try specific § references when mentioned (§ 44 SGB X)

  4. Search for amendment laws with different patterns

  5. Use specialized tools (deutsche_gesetze_suchen, rechtsprechung_suchen) for follow-up

Search Strategies for Common Questions:

Amendment questions: • "X Änderungsgesetz 2021" • "Gesetz zur Änderung X 2021" • "BGBl 2021 X" (Federal Law Gazette) • Search both enactment year AND effective year

Law interpretation: • Search law name + specific § reference • Try both formal name and abbreviation • Search for related commentary or court decisions

Case law: • Search topic + "BGH" or court name • Try legal concepts + "Rechtsprechung" • Search ECLI or case file numbers if known

Parameters: • query: Your search query in German or English (required) • threshold: Fuzzy match threshold 0.0-1.0 (default: 0.3, lower = more results) • limit: Max results (default: 5, API max: 100)

Usage Pattern:

  1. Start here for ALL legal questions

  2. Analyze results for relevant documents

  3. Use specialized tools for follow-up (deutsche_gesetze_suchen, rechtsprechung_suchen)

  4. Use dokument_details_abrufen for full text of specific documents

  5. Try query variations yourself if results insufficient

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
queryYesSearch query in German or English. Can include legal references (§ 15 BEEG), concepts (Elternzeit), or questions. Agent should try multiple variations for comprehensive search.
thresholdNoFuzzy match threshold (0.0 to 1.0, default: 0.3). Lower = more lenient matching, higher = stricter matching.
limitNoMaximum number of results to return (default: 5, API max: 100)

Tool Definition Quality

A4.8/5.0
Behavior5/5

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

With no annotations provided, the description carries full disclosure burden and excels: details database coverage limitations (GG and SGB I-VIII not available), explains internal search mechanics (Fuse.js fuzzy search vs ML embeddings), discloses FRBR data model structure, and clarifies which metadata requires follow-up calls vs immediate availability.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness4/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

Extremely long but well-structured with front-loaded critical information (PRIMARY TOOL warning). Uses markdown formatting effectively for scannable sections. While verbose, every section serves a distinct purpose (coverage gaps, data model, agent responsibilities) necessary for this complex legal domain. Minor deduction for potential tightening of redundant 'Intelligent Features' vs 'What this tool does NOT do' sections.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness5/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

No output schema exists, so description must explain return values. Comprehensive explanation of FRBR model (Work/Expression/Manifestation), immediate vs follow-up metadata availability, and result structure (HTML links, JSON-LD) fully compensates for missing output schema. Completeness is excellent given the tool's complexity and sibling coordination requirements.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters4/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema has 100% coverage (baseline 3). Description adds value by providing concrete query examples (§ 15 BEEG, Elternzeit), explaining the threshold's practical effect (lower = more lenient matching), and advising on search strategies (multiple variations, synonyms). Does not reach 5 because schema already covers technical definitions comprehensively.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose5/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

Description explicitly states the tool performs full-text search across rechtsinformationen.bund.de for both legislation and case law. It clearly distinguishes itself from siblings by labeling itself as 'PRIMARY TOOL' and explicitly stating when to use specialized follow-up tools (deutsche_gesetze_suchen, rechtsprechung_suchen) instead.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines5/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

Provides explicit when-to-use guidance ('ALWAYS USE THIS FIRST for ANY German legal question') and comprehensive when-not-to-use guidance via 'What this tool does NOT do' section and 'Usage Pattern' numbered list. Clearly maps the workflow from this tool to sibling tools for follow-up actions.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.

Install Server

Other Tools

Latest Blog Posts

MCP directory API

We provide all the information about MCP servers via our MCP API.

curl -X GET 'https://glama.ai/api/mcp/v1/servers/wolfgangihloff/rechtsinformationen-bund-de-mcp'

If you have feedback or need assistance with the MCP directory API, please join our Discord server