LegalZoom

Name: LegalZoom MCP Server
Availability: InStock
Author: LegalZoom

Productivity8 tools

Check attorney-plan access, find consultation availability and send a matter to a real lawyer from your AI assistant. Its cart tool stages a purchase you must check out yourself — the guardrail Otto Travel lacked — but request_attorney_review dispatches work to a human, and LegalZoom states information you provide is not protected by attorney-client privilege.

Verified connector

Listed by Anthropic as a partner connector in its Connectors Directory.

Connection checked by Agentman on 19 August 2026.

Anthropic states this reflects the level of review a connector received, not a security audit.

Connect LegalZoom via MCP

https://www.legalzoom.com/mcp/claude/v1

Works in any MCP-compatible client. In Agentman Studio it is one click — no config file to edit.

LegalZoom Tools & Capabilities (8)

Tool names from Anthropic's directory listing. This server requires sign-in, so we could not read tool descriptions or parameter schemas.

Limits

request_attorney_review dispatches a matter to a human attorney and nothing here recalls it. No tool among the eight cancels or withdraws a review. LegalZoom does not document whether a dispatched request can be cancelled at all. Approve this tool per call.
LegalZoom is not a law firm, in its own words. Its site footer states: LegalZoom "is not a law firm and does not provide legal advice, except where authorized through its subsidiary law firm LZ Legal Services, LLC" (MCP connection guide, fetched 2026-08-19). Its attorney pages add that attorneys advertised there are independent attorneys and that LegalZoom is not an "attorney referral service" (attorney plans, fetched 2026-08-19).
LegalZoom states information you provide is not protected by attorney-client privilege (attorney plans, fetched 2026-08-19). That is LegalZoom's statement, carried here unsoftened. We give no legal advice, express no view on privilege, and assert nothing about what any professional-conduct rule requires.
A model chooses the urgency and risk level sent to the attorney. The schema accepts four urgency values from standard through emergency, and four severity levels from low through critical. What the highest urgency value triggers on the attorney side is not documented.
Document review is capped at ten pages before fees. LegalZoom publishes $69 for 11-15 pages, $149 for 16-25, and a negotiated price at the attorney's discretion for 26 or more. Attaching a long contract can incur a charge.
"Unlimited" consultations are limited by definition, not by count. LegalZoom defines a new legal matter as one you have not previously discussed with a network attorney. Re-raising an existing matter is not a new consultation.
The tool listing disagrees with the vendor's own catalogue. LegalZoom names nine tools where Anthropic lists eight, and names the upload tool upload_document where Anthropic lists prepare_document_upload. One name is wrong at the wire and we could not establish which.
Four OAuth scopes, none of them MCP-specific. All four are generic OpenID Connect identity scopes. A fifth, legalzoom_mcp, appears in the RFC 8414 metadata but not in the protected-resource descriptor; the two documents disagree. No scope separates reading from dispatching.
The root-form RFC 9728 descriptor is misleading. It returns HTTP 200 with valid JSON describing the whole site and no scope list. Only the path-append form the challenge names is authoritative.
The connector is US-only. The jurisdiction enum accepts 50 state codes plus DC and nothing else, and LegalZoom's llms.txt states its primary jurisdiction is US federal and state law.
Uploads accept PDF, DOC and DOCX only, to 100 MB, must precede the consultation booking, and arrive through an expiring browser link rather than the chat.
Everything on this page is documentation, not testing. No tool was called, no account authenticated, no OAuth flow begun, nothing added to a cart and no attorney review requested.

Frequently asked questions

Does the LegalZoom MCP server spend my money without asking?

No. Its cart tool adds the Business Attorney Plan to a cart and returns a checkout link the vendor's own tool description tells the model to hand you. Nothing is charged until you complete checkout in a browser yourself. That is a genuine guardrail — the purchase stops at a link rather than completing, unlike connectors whose booking tools charge a stored card directly.

What does request_attorney_review actually do?

It dispatches your matter to a real attorney. LegalZoom's tool description says the attorney receives your full conversation context — questions, documents and AI analysis — either as async messaging or a scheduled phone call. This commits a human being's time, and no tool in the eight-tool surface cancels or withdraws a request once it is sent. Treat it as a one-way action.

Is information I share through the LegalZoom connector confidential?

LegalZoom states it is not. Its attorney pages carry an advertisement disclosure saying information you provide to LegalZoom is not protected by attorney-client privilege, and that it is not an attorney referral service or a law firm. We report that statement and give no legal advice about it. Review the wording yourself before attaching a sensitive contract.

How many attorney consultations does the LegalZoom plan include?

LegalZoom advertises unlimited 30-minute consultations on new legal matters, defining a new matter as an issue or document you have not previously discussed with a network attorney. Document review covers ten pages; longer documents carry flat fees of $69 for 11-15 pages and $149 for 16-25, with 26-plus pages negotiated at the attorney's discretion.

Do I need a paid LegalZoom plan to use the connector?

For the consequential tools, yes. All eight tools on the Claude endpoint sit in LegalZoom's attorney-assistance family and require sign-in, and requesting a review requires an entitlement. The Business Attorney Plan runs $259 billed every six months or $469 annually. The cart tool exists precisely to sell you that plan when the entitlement check finds none.

How many tools does the LegalZoom MCP server expose?

Anthropic's directory lists eight, but LegalZoom's own machine-readable catalogue names nine for the same endpoint. The catalogue adds an attorney-profile lookup and calls the upload tool a different name than the directory does. LegalZoom publishes 24 tools across seven families overall, most of them routed to other AI clients rather than to Claude.

Can I grant read-only access so it cannot contact an attorney?

No. The protected-resource descriptor advertises four OAuth scopes, all of them generic identity scopes — sign-in, profile, email and refresh. None separates reading availability from dispatching a review or adding a plan to a cart. Granularity has to come from your client's per-call approval prompt, not from the token you issue.

Sources

LegalZoom capability catalogue — https://www.legalzoom.com/mcp/catalog.json (fetched 2026-08-19; the machine-readable tool contract LegalZoom's own llms.txt points to. Source of every tool description, input schema and annotation quoted on this page, the nine-tool Claude tool set, the per-integration availability comparison against ChatGPT, the cart tool's checkout-link behaviour and indirectPurchase flag, the review tool's dispatch semantics and urgency/risk enums, the 50-state jurisdiction enum, and the upload tool's format, size and virus-scanning constraints) · retrieved 2026-08-19
LegalZoom capability catalogue, plain text — https://www.legalzoom.com/mcp/catalog.txt (fetched 2026-08-19; the human-readable companion, used to cross-check the seven capability families and their tool counts) · retrieved 2026-08-19
LegalZoom, MCP connection guide — https://www.legalzoom.com/tools/mcp-docs (fetched 2026-08-19; the URL Anthropic's directory publishes as this connector's documentation. Source of the four connection steps, the three prerequisites, the 24-tools-across-7-families-and-8-integrations count, the privacy and troubleshooting guidance, the expiring-upload-link statement, and the not-a-law-firm disclaimer carried in the site footer) · retrieved 2026-08-19
LegalZoom, attorney plans — https://www.legalzoom.com/attorneys/ (fetched 2026-08-19, located via the sitemap named in robots.txt rather than guessed; source of the $259 six-month and $469 annual Business Attorney Plan pricing, the unlimited-30-minute-consults claim and its new-legal-matter definition, the ten-page document-review inclusion and the $69/$149/negotiated overage schedule, the independent-attorneys and not-an-attorney-referral-service disclosure, and the statement that information provided to LegalZoom is not protected by attorney-client privilege) · retrieved 2026-08-19
LegalZoom, AI capabilities directory — https://www.legalzoom.com/ai (fetched 2026-08-19; the human-facing capability index, used to corroborate the 24-tool total and the seven-family taxonomy) · retrieved 2026-08-19
Live anonymous probe — 2026-08-19: a single anonymous POST to https://www.legalzoom.com/mcp/claude/v1 returned HTTP 401 with {"error":"Authentication required"} and a www-authenticate Bearer challenge naming a resource_metadata URL in the path-append form. No credentials were supplied, no OAuth flow was begun, and no tool on this server was invoked at any point · retrieved 2026-08-19
Live RFC 9728 protected-resource descriptors — https://www.legalzoom.com/.well-known/oauth-protected-resource and its path-append form at /.well-known/oauth-protected-resource/mcp/claude/v1 (both fetched 2026-08-19; the root form returns HTTP 200 with a site-wide descriptor carrying no scopes_supported key, the path-append form returns HTTP 200 with the four named scopes, and the path-insert form returns HTTP 404 as 13 bytes of plain text). Source of the four scopes and the resource identifier · retrieved 2026-08-19
Live RFC 8414 authorization-server metadata — https://www.legalzoom.com/.well-known/oauth-authorization-server/mcp/claude/v1 (fetched 2026-08-19; the root form returns HTTP 404 with a 231 KB SPA HTML shell. Source of the issuer, the three grant types, the S256 challenge method, the DPoP and certificate-binding support, the advertised registration endpoint, and the fifth legalzoom_mcp scope absent from the resource descriptor) · retrieved 2026-08-19
Live sibling-endpoint probes — 2026-08-19: anonymous initialize POSTs to the two sibling paths named in LegalZoom's own catalogue (no URL was guessed) returned HTTP 403 with text/html bodies, while the unauthenticated default at https://www.legalzoom.com/mcp returned a JSON-RPC 200 whose server instructions state the integration is for information and education only. Source of the finding that the per-client family is real and access-gated · retrieved 2026-08-19
www.legalzoom.com/robots.txt (fetched 2026-08-19; allows all crawlers with a long disallow list, names three sitemaps — which is how the attorney-plans page above was located rather than guessed — carries no Content-Signal line, and disallows five named AI crawlers including ClaudeBot and GPTBot from the privacy policy specifically) · retrieved 2026-08-19
www.legalzoom.com/llms.txt (fetched 2026-08-19; an unusually substantive file. Source of the pointer to the machine-readable catalogue endpoints, the stated US-primary-jurisdiction scope, the citation and quoting preferences, and the AI-safety note advising that users be told to consult qualified legal professionals) · retrieved 2026-08-19
Anthropic connector directory — https://claude.ai/directory/d87c0d44-2615-4af6-b3ac-ba22264496b2 (snapshot 2026-08-16; source of the eight tool names as listed, the "Read and write" permissions label, the partner tier, the streamable-HTTP transport, the two categories, the vendor's own description of routing users to vetted attorneys, and an empty prompt list) · retrieved 2026-08-16
LegalZoom privacy policy — https://www.legalzoom.com/legal/general-terms/privacy-policy (not fetched. LegalZoom's robots.txt explicitly disallows ClaudeBot and four other AI crawlers from this path, so we did not retrieve it and nothing on this page is sourced from it. LegalZoom's binding data commitments live there)