Australian Law MCP vs Entscheidsuche — Schw… | AllMCPs
Side-by-Side Model Context Protocol Comparison
Australian Law MCP vs Entscheidsuche — Schweizer Gerichtsentscheide
In-depth architectural comparison of the Australian Law MCP and Entscheidsuche — Schweizer Gerichtsentscheide MCP servers. Compare execution transports, security boundaries, tool capabilities, quality scores, and ready-to-paste client installation snippets for Claude, Cursor, Windsurf, and VS Code.
At a Glance & Executive Verdict
Australian Law MCP
Legal · Local stdio
Quality: 57/100 (Good) | Auth: No auth required
Entscheidsuche — Schweizer Gerichtsentscheide
Legal · Remote HTTP/SSE
Quality: 49/100 (Fair) | Auth: No auth required
Verdict Summary: Choose Australian Law MCP if you need specialized Legal tools running via a local process. Choose Entscheidsuche — Schweizer Gerichtsentscheide if your workspace requires Legal integration with remote web transport. Both servers can be configured concurrently in your client's mcpServers manifest.
Which MCP Server Should You Choose?
Choose Australian Law MCP when:
You need dedicated capabilities in the Legal domain.
You prefer local stdio subprocess transport architecture.
Your security boundary fits: No auth required (Free / Open Source).
Find acts and instruments by name. Returns the title ids the other tools take.
get_law_text
The current compilation: the table of provisions, one section, or the full text paginated. Schedules are addressable too (`section="Schedule 7"`), which is where rate tables and forms actually live.
get_law_as_at
The same, but as the law stood on any past date.
verify_citations
Pull statute citations out of text and check each against the register: does the act exist, is it in force, does the cited section exist. Upstream failures come back as UNVERIFIED, never as a missing law.
get_amendment_status
In force or repealed, what the latest compilation incorporates, whether commenced amendments are still unincorporated, and what has amended it.
compare_versions
What changed between two dates: sections added, removed, reworded — or a line diff of one section.
search_full_text
Relevance-ranked search over the body text of every title on the register.
check_frl_health
Ping the register API so failures elsewhere can be attributed.
Entscheidsuche — Schweizer Gerichtsentscheide Tools (6)
search
Volltextsuche mit Lucene-Syntax. Filter nach Entscheiddatum, Scrape-Datum, Hierarchie (Kanton / Gericht / Kammer) und Sprache. Sortierung nach Relevanz, Entscheiddatum oder Scrape-Datum. Paginierung über `next_cursor` / `search_after`. Aggregationen für Facetten-Auswertung.
search_by_case_number
Exakte Phrasensuche nach Geschäftsnummern, Aktenzeichen und BGE-Zitaten (z.B. `BGE 142 III 1`, `6B_1234/2025`, `5A_396/2015`). Setzt die Nummer automatisch in Anführungszeichen.
fetch_document
Vollständigen Entscheid samt Volltext anhand der ID abrufen.
list_hierarchy
Hierarchie-IDs (Bund / Kanton / Gericht / Kammer) mit Trefferzahlen.
list_facets
Hierarchischer Facetten-Baum mit lokalisierten Labels in DE/FR/IT.
server_info
Versions- und Konfigurationsinformationen.
Ready-to-Paste Client Configurations
Paste either (or both) of these JSON server blocks into your client config file (e.g. claude_desktop_config.json or ~/.cursor/mcp.json).
Australian Law MCP is categorized under Legal and uses a local stdio subprocess. In contrast, Entscheidsuche — Schweizer Gerichtsentscheide belongs to Legal using remote streaming HTTP/SSE transport. Select Australian Law MCP when you need capabilities focused on legal and Entscheidsuche — Schweizer Gerichtsentscheide when you require tools for legal.