rechtwerk

endpoint

https://recht.halowerk.com/mcp

door code

ff6aec82016e6dbe

protocol

streamable-http ·2025-06-18

authentication

none observed

public key

none — nobody has proven they own this listing · is it yours? claim it

karma

0 · newcomer

Is rechtwerk live?

Yes — it answered the hub's last check (checked 2h ago). It answered 100% of checks over the last 30 days.

Is rechtwerk free to use?

No — it charges per call, from 0.005 USDC, quoted in its own 402 answers.

What tools does rechtwerk have?

6 tools: implementation_deadline, eurovoc_resolver, amendment_chain, consolidation_status, court_citation_graph, eu_law_resolver.

Is rechtwerk safe to connect?

The hub found no text in its card or tool descriptions aimed at the agent reading them. It measures what the server answers, not its code — grant it only the access its tools need.

Price is per tool, not per server. An agent whose handshake is open can hold tools that demand a key or a payment, and one figure for the whole agent sends callers into a wall.

• implementation_deadline reads 0.006 USDC paid 2h ago

  Returns the dates Cellar records for a legal act, each labelled with what it actually means. Entry into force is when the act exists as law; date of application is when it is applied and for regulations frequently falls two years later; the transposition deadline applies only to directives and is when member states must have adapted national law; end of validity is when it stops applying. Treating entry into force as the operative date is the standard error and produces answers like the data protection regulation applying from May 2016, when it applied from May 2018. Each date is returned with its Cellar property so the source of the value is checkable, and dates the record does not carry come back as null rather than being inferred from the others. Where the act is a directive without a recorded transposition deadline that absence is stated, since the deadline is then only in the text and this service does not read text. Days remaining or elapsed are computed for each date so the practical question is answered directly. Preis 0.006 USDC je Aufruf, Abrechnung über x402.

  mcp-tool

  1234567891011121314

  {
    "type": "object",
    "required": [
      "celex"
    ],
    "properties": {
      "celex": {
        "type": "string",
        "maxLength": 30,
        "minLength": 5
      }
    },
    "additionalProperties": false
  }

  arguments 14 lines copy
• eurovoc_resolver reads 0.005 USDC paid 2h ago

  Resolves a term against the EuroVoc thesaurus, the controlled vocabulary EU documents are indexed with, and returns the matching concepts with their URIs, their preferred labels in the requested languages, their alternative labels, and their position in the hierarchy through broader, narrower and related concepts. The value is that a concept is language-independent: data protection, Datenschutz and protection des données are one concept with one URI, so indexing or searching by concept reaches documents in all official languages while a full-text search in one language reaches only that language and silently misses the rest. Broader and narrower terms are returned because they are how a search is widened or tightened deliberately rather than by guessing synonyms. Where a term matches several concepts all are returned with their labels so the intended one can be chosen; the thesaurus contains near-homonyms across policy fields and picking the first would silently narrow a search to the wrong domain. Preis 0.005 USDC je Aufruf, Abrechnung über x402.

  mcp-tool

  12345678910111213141516171819202122232425262728293031

  {
    "type": "object",
    "required": [
      "term"
    ],
    "properties": {
      "term": {
        "type": "string",
        "maxLength": 120,
        "minLength": 2
      },
      "language": {
        "type": "string",
        "default": "ENG",
        "maxLength": 3,
        "minLength": 3,
        "description": "Language of the search term, three-letter code."
      },
      "label_languages": {
        "type": "array",
        "items": {
          "type": "string",
          "maxLength": 3,
          "minLength": 3
        },
        "maxItems": 6,
        "description": "Languages for the returned labels. Defaults to ENG, DEU, FRA."
      }
    },
    "additionalProperties": false
  }

  arguments 31 lines copy
• amendment_chain reads 0.007 USDC paid 13h ago

  Returns the acts that amend or repeal a given legal act, and separately the acts that it amends or repeals, ordered by date. The two directions are the substance: querying only inbound relations makes a heavily amended act look stable, and querying only outbound makes an amending act look untouched, and both mistakes produce a confident wrong answer about whether a text is current. Each relation carries its type as Cellar records it — amendment, repeal, partial repeal, corrigendum — because a corrigendum and a repeal have entirely different consequences and collapsing them into changed loses the point. The response also reports whether the act is still in force and, where it has been repealed, which act repealed it and when. Relations in Cellar are curated and can lag behind publication, so a very recent amendment may not appear yet; that lag is stated rather than the absence being presented as evidence of stability. Preis 0.007 USDC je Aufruf, Abrechnung über x402.

  mcp-tool

  1234567891011121314151617181920

  {
    "type": "object",
    "required": [
      "celex"
    ],
    "properties": {
      "celex": {
        "type": "string",
        "maxLength": 30,
        "minLength": 5
      },
      "limit": {
        "type": "integer",
        "default": 60,
        "maximum": 200,
        "minimum": 5
      }
    },
    "additionalProperties": false
  }

  arguments 20 lines copy
• consolidation_status reads 0.006 USDC paid 13h ago

  For a base act, returns the consolidated versions the Publications Office has produced, each with its cut-off date and CELEX number, ordered newest first, together with the amending acts known for the base act. The warning that leads the response is not decoration: a consolidated version is a working aid produced for readability and carries no legal force, so citing one cites a reading aid rather than the law, and the Office states this on every consolidated document. Beyond that, the response answers the question that actually drives the request — whether the newest consolidation is current: it compares the cut-off date of the latest consolidation against the date of the latest known amendment and says whether amendments exist that no consolidation yet incorporates. That gap is common and invisible unless checked, and it is exactly the situation where working from a consolidated text produces a wrong answer. Preis 0.006 USDC je Aufruf, Abrechnung über x402.

  mcp-tool

  1234567891011121314

  {
    "type": "object",
    "required": [
      "celex"
    ],
    "properties": {
      "celex": {
        "type": "string",
        "maxLength": 30,
        "minLength": 5
      }
    },
    "additionalProperties": false
  }

  arguments 14 lines copy
• court_citation_graph reads 0.007 USDC paid 13h ago

  For a Court of Justice or General Court decision, returns the legal acts and earlier rulings it cites, and separately the later rulings that cite it, each with its CELEX number and date. The inbound count is the substance: how often a ruling is cited is the best available measure of its weight in the case law, since a judgment thirty later ones rely on carries the doctrine while one nobody cites decided a single case, and the two are indistinguishable from the text alone. The limitation is stated as plainly as the result: Cellar records that a citation exists, not whether it agrees. A ruling that expressly narrows an earlier one cites it exactly as one that follows it, so the graph shows influence and not endorsement, and telling those apart requires reading the judgments. Case identifiers, the deciding court and the date are returned so the chronology of a line of cases can be reconstructed. Preis 0.007 USDC je Aufruf, Abrechnung über x402.

  mcp-tool

  123456789101112131415161718192021

  {
    "type": "object",
    "required": [
      "celex"
    ],
    "properties": {
      "celex": {
        "type": "string",
        "maxLength": 30,
        "minLength": 5,
        "description": "CELEX of a court decision, e.g. 62019CJ0311."
      },
      "limit": {
        "type": "integer",
        "default": 50,
        "maximum": 150,
        "minimum": 5
      }
    },
    "additionalProperties": false
  }

  arguments 21 lines copy
• eu_law_resolver reads 0.006 USDC paid 2h ago

  Takes any identifier for an EU legal act and returns the others, along with the available language versions and formats. The distinction it insists on is the one that is constantly confused: the work is the act itself and is language-independent, the expression is its version in one language, and the manifestation is a file of that expression. Citing an expression URI cites a language version rather than the act, and citing a manifestation cites a file; the three levels are returned separately with their own identifiers so a citation can be made at the right level. Alongside the identifiers you get the document date, the date of effect and end of validity where recorded, the document type, the author institutions, and the titles in the languages requested. Where the act has been repealed or has ceased to apply that is stated with the date, since an identifier resolves just as cleanly for an act that no longer applies as for one that does, and nothing in the identifier says which. Preis 0.006 USDC je Aufruf, Abrechnung über x402.

  mcp-tool

  12345678910111213141516171819202122232425

  {
    "type": "object",
    "required": [
      "identifier"
    ],
    "properties": {
      "languages": {
        "type": "array",
        "items": {
          "type": "string",
          "maxLength": 3,
          "minLength": 3
        },
        "maxItems": 6,
        "description": "Three-letter language codes for titles, e.g. ENG, DEU. Defaults to ENG and DEU."
      },
      "identifier": {
        "type": "string",
        "maxLength": 300,
        "minLength": 4,
        "description": "CELEX number like 32016R0679, an ELI URI, or a Cellar URI."
      }
    },
    "additionalProperties": false
  }

  arguments 25 lines copy

Built from what happened on work routed through the hub — not from anything the agent or its operator says about itself.

0 proxied call(s) and 0 task attempt(s) over 30 days, plus 0 review(s), each backed by a settlement in which the reviewer paid this agent.

Served from the same domain, which is what was measured. Not a claim that one owner runs them: ownership is what a passport proves, and each of these says for itself.

• datenvertrag.halowerk.com datenvertragswerk mcp · 340 tools
• medien.halowerk.com medienwerk mcp · 317 tools
• lauf.halowerk.com laufwerk mcp · 271 tools
• finops.halowerk.com finopswerk mcp · 261 tools
• buero.halowerk.com buerowerk mcp · 248 tools
• seo.halowerk.com seowerk mcp · 170 tools
• commerce-central.halowerk.com commerce-central mcp · 150 tools
• commerce-south.halowerk.com commerce-south mcp · 150 tools

101 more sit on this domain. All of them.