Pakistan Case Law

Later cases citing a judgment

caselaw_get_cited_by

Read-onlyIdempotent

Walk the citation graph BACKWARD: list later cases that cite THIS judgment (how it was subsequently treated — followed, distinguished, relied upon). Returns newest first.

Most useful on OLDER or landmark judgments: it shows whether the case is still followed and
where the principle has been applied since. A leading case can have hundreds of citing cases.

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "case_id": "<case_id>"
    },
    "name": "caselaw_get_cited_by"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`limit`	No
`offset`	No
`case_id`	Yes	Numeric judgment id
`response_format`	No		markdown

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`result`	Yes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed5 schema fields changedOct 1, 2026
- removedInput schema / $defs
```
Removed value: -{
-  "Fmt": {
-    "enum": [
-      "markdown",
-      "json"
-    ],
-    "title": "Fmt",
-    "type": "string"
-  }
-}
```
- removedInput schema / properties / response_format / $ref
```
Removed value: -"#/$defs/Fmt"
```
- addedInput schema / properties / response_format / enum
```
Added value: +[
+  "markdown",
+  "json"
+]
```
- addedInput schema / properties / response_format / title
```
Added value: +"Response Format"
```
- addedInput schema / properties / response_format / type
```
Added value: +"string"
```
First observedSep 6, 2026

TDQS

A3.7/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare read-only, idempotent, closed-world behavior, so the safety bar is low. The description adds real value beyond them: result ordering ('newest first'), the semantic content of results (followed/distinguished/relied upon), and a volume warning ('can have hundreds of citing cases') that signals pagination is likely needed.

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?

Front-loads the core definition in the first sentence and puts the useful context afterward; no filler. Slightly repetitive in restating 'later cases' and 'citing cases' across sentences.

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

Completeness4/5

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

An output schema exists and annotations cover the safety profile, so remaining burden is modest. The definition covers scope, direction, ordering, and result semantics, but the lack of pagination and response_format guidance keeps it from being fully self-sufficient for a tool that may return hundreds of rows.

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

Parameters2/5

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

Schema coverage is only 25%: only case_id carries a description, while limit, offset, and response_format are undocumented in both schema and description. The description's mention of hundreds of citing cases hints that pagination matters but never explains how to use limit/offset or what response_format changes, so it does not compensate for the coverage gap.

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

Purpose4/5

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

States a specific verb and resource ('list later cases that cite THIS judgment') and emphasizes the directionality ('BACKWARD'), which implicitly separates it from the forward-citing sibling. It stops short of naming caselaw_get_citations explicitly, which is what would make the distinction airtight.

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

Usage Guidelines4/5

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

Gives a clear positive-use condition ('Most useful on OLDER or landmark judgments') and explains the question it answers (whether a case is still followed). No explicit 'when not to use' or named alternative, so an agent must infer that it should call caselaw_get_citations for the opposite direction.

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

All Pakistan Case Law tools Inspect

Try in Browser

One endpoint for every MCP toolRayrun runs every MCP server behind one URL and holds the credentials. Each call is decided per client, tool, and argument, then recorded.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

Resources

Need Help?