A
licenseA
qualityC
maintenanceMCP server for U.S. federal law that enables searching the U.S. Code, CFR, Federal Register, case law, and bills, with citation verification against primary sources to prevent hallucinations.
11
MIT
Probative legal-marketing data
Server Details
Free, cited reference data for US law-firm marketing: lawyer advertising rules for all 50 states and DC, bar ad-filing fees, contingency fee caps, ethics opinions (incl. AI), ad-platform policies, federal MDL dockets, federal civil filings, statutes of limitations, law-office competition and legal deserts by county, lawyer wages, fatal crashes, CFPB, EEOC and FCC complaint data. Every answer carries its source, DOI and the date it was checked. Main server: 24 tools; one more server per dataset at /mcp/. Read-only, no sign-in, CC BY 4.0. Published by Probative Growth, a marketing agency for law firms. Not legal advice.
Ownership verified
- Status
- Healthy
- Last Tested
- Transport
- Streamable HTTP · MCP 2025-11-25
- URL
TDQS
B3.2/5.0
Scored across 24 tools
Disambiguation3/5
Most tools target distinct resources or actions, but several retrieval tools overlap: search, data_search, search_rules, search_ethics_opinions, and fetch can be confused depending on the user's intent. Rule retrieval is also split across get_rule, get_state_rules, search_rules, and compare_states, which is understandable but adds selection risk.
Naming Consistency3/5
Names are consistently snake_case and mostly readable, but the verb conventions are mixed: get_*, list_*, search_*, data_*, plus bare verbs like cite, fetch, and search, and whats_new. The set is not chaotic, but it does not follow one predictable naming pattern.
Tool Count3/5
The server covers a broad legal-marketing data domain, so 24 tools are not unreasonable, but this is on the heavy side. Some tools could likely be consolidated, especially the overlapping search and rule-retrieval tools.
Completeness4/5
The surface covers datasets, lookup, comparison, citation, rules, ethics opinions, fee caps, platform policies, benchmarks, market briefs, court data, MDL dockets, and change tracking. The main minor gap is that record retrieval is primarily single-record via fetch rather than supporting bulk retrieval of multiple search results.
Available Tools
24 toolscalculate_fee_capCalculate the legal limit on an attorney feeBRead-onlyIdempotentInspect
The most a lawyer may charge, in dollars, on one award, settlement or past-due benefit under a legal fee cap.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| stage | No | Optional: the stage, e.g. "administrative" or "litigation"… | |
| program | Yes | ||
| award_usd | Yes | The award, settlement or past-due benefits in US dollars (the… | |
| jurisdiction | Yes | Two-letter state code, DC, or US for federal programs (Social… | |
| response_format | No | concise |
Output Schema
| Name | Required | Description |
|---|---|---|
No output parameters | ||
TDQS
B3.1/5.0
Behavior3/5
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
The annotations already establish that this is a read-only, idempotent, non-destructive, closed-world operation. The description adds useful scope by saying the result is a dollar maximum for one award, settlement, or past-due benefit, but it does not add much beyond that about calculation behavior or limitations.
Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.
Conciseness5/5
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
The description is a single compact sentence with no wasted wording. It is front-loaded with the core result: the maximum dollar charge under a legal fee cap.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Completeness3/5
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 return values and side effects do not need to be repeated. However, the description leaves important contextual gaps around when to use this tool versus get_attorney_fee_caps and what the required jurisdiction/program inputs mean.
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 description coverage is only 60%, and the description does not compensate for the gaps. It mentions the award/settlement/past-due benefit concept but says nothing about required parameters such as jurisdiction or program, nor about stage or response_format.
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?
The description identifies a specific resource and scope: the maximum dollar amount a lawyer may charge on one award, settlement, or past-due benefit under a legal fee cap. It is clear about what is being returned, but it does not explicitly distinguish this calculation tool from the sibling get_attorney_fee_caps.
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Usage Guidelines2/5
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
The description gives no explicit when-to-use guidance and does not name alternatives. In particular, it does not tell the agent when to calculate a cap here versus retrieving fee-cap rules via get_attorney_fee_caps.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
check_ad_elementsWhich state ad rules an ad touchesARead-onlyIdempotentInspect
Which of one state's lawyer ad rules an ad touches, from what it contains (testimonials, past results, expert claims, actors, Spanish, AI) or its text. Results are not legal advice.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| state | Yes | Two-letter code (TX) or DC; full names also work | |
| ad_text | No | Optional ad copy, script or landing-page text, scanned for… | |
| elements | No | What the ad contains. Leave out to rely on ad_text only. | |
| response_format | No | concise |
Output Schema
| Name | Required | Description |
|---|---|---|
No output parameters | ||
TDQS
A3.5/5.0
Behavior3/5
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, destructiveHint=false and openWorldHint=false, so the safety profile is fully covered by structured data. The description adds little behavioral context beyond a 'not legal advice' caveat; it does not mention scope limits (e.g., US states only) or how exhaustive the rule matching is. With annotations doing the heavy lifting, a 3 is appropriate.
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?
The core mapping statement is front-loaded in a single dense sentence, with the disclaimer trailing it. Nothing is bloated, though the parenthetical enumeration is somewhat redundant against the schema's enum list and the disclaimer sits awkwardly in the same breath as the functional description.
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, so return-value explanation is not needed, and the annotations cover the safety profile. What remains slightly thin is jurisdictional scope (the schema hints at US states/DC but the description never says it) and whether the two content inputs are combinable. For a read-only four-parameter checker, this is close to complete.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Parameters3/5
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
Schema description coverage is 75%, so the schema already documents state, ad_text and elements, including the explicit note that omitting elements relies on ad_text alone. The description's parenthetical list (testimonials, past results, expert claims, actors, Spanish, AI) loosely mirrors the enum values but does not map cleanly to all ten enum members. response_format has no description in either place, leaving one 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?
The description states a specific operation — mapping an ad's content or text to the state lawyer-ad rules it implicates — with the resource ('one state's lawyer ad rules') clearly named. It is distinguishable from siblings like get_state_rules or search_rules by being a content-to-rule matcher rather than a rule lookup. It stops short of naming those siblings explicitly, so the differentiation is inferred rather than stated.
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Usage Guidelines3/5
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
The phrase 'from what it contains ... or its text' implies two input modes (declared elements vs. scanned ad copy), which is useful implied usage guidance. However, there is no explicit when-to-use guidance, no statement about when to prefer get_state_rules or get_ad_filing_requirements instead, and no guidance on whether ad_text and elements can be supplied together.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
citeHow to citeBRead-onlyIdempotentInspect
How to cite a dataset, a state or one record: the citation sentence, credit line, DOI and URL to cite. CC BY 4.0 asks for credit and a link.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| id | No | Other datasets: the record id | |
| state | No | rules only: two-letter code, or DC | |
| topic | No | rules only: topic key, e.g. filing | |
| dataset | No | rules | |
| response_format | No | concise |
Output Schema
| Name | Required | Description |
|---|---|---|
No output parameters | ||
TDQS
B3.4/5.0
Behavior3/5
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, destructiveHint=false and a closed-world scope, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds the license-attribution rationale (CC BY 4.0 asks for credit and a link) and the nature of the returned citation artifacts, which is modest added context. Nothing is said about how response_format changes the output, though the output schema covers returns.
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?
Two short sentences, front-loaded with what the tool returns, with no wasted clauses. The attribution sentence is slightly tangential but carries the reason the tool exists.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Completeness3/5
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
An output schema exists, so return values need not be spelled out, and the safety profile is fully annotated. However, for a five-parameter tool with zero required parameters, the description never explains how the parameters interact (can state and topic be combined with dataset? does id override dataset?), leaving real gaps for correct invocation.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Parameters3/5
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
Schema coverage is 60%, so the description's mention of dataset/state/record (id) adds a little framing but no syntax or constraint detail. The two undocumented-or-thin areas, topic ('rules only') and response_format (enum with no description), are not clarified by the description, 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?
Specific verb+resource: it produces the citation sentence, credit line, DOI and URL for a dataset, a state, or a single record. The three granularity levels are named, which lets an agent match its intent to the right scope. It does not explicitly contrast with any sibling, but no sibling overlaps this function.
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Usage Guidelines3/5
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
The phrase 'a dataset, a state or one record' implies the three usage shapes and maps loosely to the parameters, but the description never states prerequisites, which combination of parameters is valid, or when to use this versus data_lookup. Usage must be inferred from the schema text.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
compare_statesCompare one rule across statesARead-onlyIdempotentInspect
Which states do what: one ad-rule topic (e.g. the waiting period before contacting accident victims, texting, filing) side by side across states, or all 50 and DC. Results are not legal advice.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| topic | Yes | ||
| states | No | Two-letter codes. Leave out for every jurisdiction. | |
| response_format | No | concise |
Output Schema
| Name | Required | Description |
|---|---|---|
No output parameters | ||
TDQS
A3.5/5.0
Behavior3/5
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already declare readOnly, idempotent, non-destructive, closed-world behavior, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds the 'side by side' comparison framing and a legal-advice disclaimer, but says nothing about result size, coverage gaps, or freshness across jurisdictions.
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-loaded with the core value proposition and short enough to scan in one pass. The parenthetical examples earn their space by disambiguating 'topic,' though the phrasing is slightly run-on.
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?
With an output schema present, return shape needn't be described, and the description covers purpose, topic scope, and the default all-jurisdiction behavior. The main remaining gap is guidance on how this relates to the single-state and search siblings.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Parameters3/5
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
Coverage is only 33%, so the description carries extra weight; it partially compensates by giving concrete topic examples that map onto the enum. However, the 'leave out for every jurisdiction' behavior for states merely restates the schema description, and response_format is never mentioned in prose.
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 concrete verb-and-resource: it compares one ad-rule topic side by side across states or all 50 plus DC. The examples (waiting period, texting, filing) make the resource tangible. It doesn't name the neighboring single-state tools, so differentiation is inferable rather than explicit.
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Usage Guidelines3/5
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
Usage is implied by the multi-state framing and the note that omitting states covers every jurisdiction, but the description never says when to prefer this over get_state_rules, get_rule, or search_rules. An agent must infer the split from names alone.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
data_compareCompare keys in a datasetBRead-onlyIdempotentInspect
Compare up to 10 states, counties or other keys of one dataset side by side, e.g. lawyer pay or bar pass rates in two states. Results are not legal advice.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| keys | Yes | ||
| dataset | Yes | ||
| response_format | No | concise |
Output Schema
| Name | Required | Description |
|---|---|---|
No output parameters | ||
TDQS
B3.4/5.0
Behavior3/5
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already declare readOnly, idempotent, non-destructive, closed-world behavior, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds only the 10-key ceiling and a 'not legal advice' disclaimer; it does not explain what 'concise' vs 'detailed' output changes or whether keys must belong to the same dataset dimension.
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?
Two short sentences: the capability and its scope come first, then a caveat. No filler, though the disclaimer occupies a slot that could have documented response_format or dataset semantics.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Completeness3/5
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
An output schema exists, so return values needn't be described. Still, with two enums and a 37-value dataset list at 0% schema coverage, the description leaves meaningful gaps: whether keys can be mixed across datasets, what response_format does, and how results are shaped by dataset choice.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Parameters3/5
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
Schema description coverage is 0%, so the description has to carry the load. It usefully clarifies that 'keys' means states, counties, or similar identifiers (the schema only says strings), but leaves the large dataset enum and the response_format parameter entirely unexplained.
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 (compare keys of one dataset side by side) and gives concrete examples of keys. It doesn't distinguish itself from the sibling compare_states or data_lookup, so an agent can't tell from the description alone which comparison tool to pick, but the core purpose is unambiguous.
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Usage Guidelines3/5
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
Implies usage through the example ('lawyer pay or bar pass rates in two states') and the 'up to 10 keys' ceiling, which hints at lightweight side-by-side comparison. There is no explicit when-to-use versus compare_states, data_lookup, or data_search, and no exclusions.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
data_lookupLook up one key in a datasetBRead-onlyIdempotentInspect
Figures for one state, county or other key from one open dataset, e.g. limitation periods, lawyers per resident, bankruptcy filings, law firms, court backlogs. Results are not legal advice.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| key | Yes | The key, e.g. TX, google-ads, 19100, MDL-2738 | |
| dataset | Yes | ||
| response_format | No | concise |
Output Schema
| Name | Required | Description |
|---|---|---|
No output parameters | ||
TDQS
B3.4/5.0
Behavior3/5
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, destructiveHint=false and openWorldHint=false, so the safety profile is fully covered. The description adds only the disclaimer that results are not legal advice; it says nothing about behavior on an unknown key, missing data, or dataset coverage gaps. With annotations carrying the load, this is adequate but thin.
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?
Two short sentences with the core scope front-loaded and no filler; the example list earns its space by clarifying what 'dataset' covers. Slightly dense enumeration, but nothing to cut.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Completeness3/5
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
An output schema exists, so return values need no explanation, and the enum constrains the dataset choice. However, the description never points to list_datasets for discovering valid datasets or explains response_format's effect on output size, both of which an agent needs to call this correctly.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Parameters3/5
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
Schema coverage is 33% — the key parameter is documented and dataset is an enum, but response_format (concise/detailed, default concise) is never mentioned in the description. The parenthetical examples ('limitation periods, lawyers per resident, bankruptcy filings') do help the agent map an information need onto the correct dataset enum value, which is genuine added value above the bare enum list.
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?
The description states a specific retrieval action ('Figures for one state, county or other key from one open dataset') with the scoping constraint of one key against one dataset. The concrete parenthetical examples make the resource unambiguous. It stops short of naming the sibling tools it differs from (data_compare, data_search, list_datasets), so an agent must infer the single-key vs. multi-key boundary.
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Usage Guidelines3/5
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
'One state, county or other key from one open dataset' implies the single-key use case and the example list hints at which queries fit, but no alternative tool is named and there is no when-not-to-use guidance. The only other sentence ('Results are not legal advice') is a liability disclaimer, not usage guidance.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
data_searchSearch the datasetsBRead-onlyIdempotentInspect
Find records by words across the open datasets when you do not know the key, e.g. "nursing home abuse" or "legal services price index". Results are not legal advice.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| limit | No | ||
| query | Yes | ||
| datasets | No | ||
| response_format | No | concise |
Output Schema
| Name | Required | Description |
|---|---|---|
No output parameters | ||
TDQS
B3.4/5.0
Behavior3/5
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already declare readOnly, idempotent, non-destructive, and closed-world, so safety is covered. The description adds only a 'not legal advice' disclaimer and query phrasing examples; it does not mention the default/max result count, per-dataset scoping, or how results are ranked or truncated.
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?
One front-loaded sentence covers purpose, trigger condition, and examples without waste. The trailing 'Results are not legal advice' sentence is boilerplate but short and required.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Completeness3/5
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
With an output schema present, return values need not be explained, and `limit`/`response_format` are largely self-evident from their names. However, a free-text search over 38 selectable datasets with a truncated result cap warrants at least a note on scoping or result breadth, which is missing.
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 description coverage is 0%, so the description must carry parameter meaning, but it only illustrates the `query` field. The `datasets` filter (38 enum values), `limit` (1-25, default 5), and `response_format` choices are left entirely to their bare names and constraints.
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 concrete verb and resource ('Find records by words across the open datasets') and signals the key-lookup alternative with 'when you do not know the key'. It never names the sibling (e.g. data_lookup) or the underlying corpus by name, so differentiation is inferred rather than explicit.
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 selection condition ('when you do not know the key') plus concrete query examples, which is enough for an agent to decide to search rather than look up. It offers no explicit exclusion or named alternative tool, and says nothing about when to prefer list_datasets or search.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
fetchFetch one legal-marketing recordARead-onlyIdempotentInspect
The full text of one record found with search (ids like rules:TX:filing, opinions:ny-nysba-1306 or benchmarks:speed-to-sign). Not legal advice.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| id | Yes | An id from search |
Output Schema
| Name | Required | Description |
|---|---|---|
No output parameters | ||
TDQS
A3.6/5.0
Behavior3/5
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already declare readOnly, idempotent, non-destructive and closed-world, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds that the return is full text rather than a summary, but says nothing about error behavior for unknown or malformed ids, which matters for a lookup keyed on a string id.
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?
Two short sentences, front-loaded with what is returned. Every clause earns its place: the id examples and the 'not legal advice' note are both load-bearing. Slightly clipped phrasing ('The full text of one record found with search') costs a little readability.
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, so return structure needn't be described, and the sole parameter is fully documented. The remaining gap is error handling and the boundaries versus sibling get_* tools, but for a one-parameter read tool this is close to complete.
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 coverage is 100%, so baseline is 3, but the description goes further by giving three concrete id shapes across namespaces (rules:, opinions:, benchmarks:), which tells the agent more than the schema's 'An id from search'. This is real added value for constructing a valid call.
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: retrieves 'the full text of one record'. The generic name 'fetch' is rescued by the description, which clarifies the resource is a legal-marketing record and that it works on ids produced by search. It does not differentiate from siblings like get_rule or get_benchmark, which also return single records.
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Usage Guidelines3/5
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
'found with search' implies a two-step workflow (search first, then fetch), which is genuine usage guidance. However, no exclusion is given against sibling single-record tools such as get_rule, get_benchmark or cite, so an agent cannot tell from this text alone which one to call for a rule versus a benchmark.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
get_ad_filing_requirementsBar ad filing requirements and fees for one stateBRead-onlyIdempotentInspect
Whether a state's bar requires lawyers to file or submit ads for review, which ads, when. Results are not legal advice.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| state | Yes | Two-letter code (TX) or DC; full names (Texas) also work | |
| response_format | No | concise |
Output Schema
| Name | Required | Description |
|---|---|---|
No output parameters | ||
TDQS
B3/5.0
Behavior3/5
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, destructiveHint=false, and openWorldHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds a useful legal disclaimer and outlines what dimensions are returned, but it does not mention fees despite the title and adds no auth or rate-limit context.
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?
The description is two short sentences, front-loaded with the core query and followed by a relevant disclaimer. It is efficient, though the omission of fees leaves a gap that conciseness alone cannot excuse.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Completeness3/5
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 return values need not be explained. However, the description omits the fees dimension named in the title and gives no guidance on response_format or when to use this tool versus siblings such as get_state_rules.
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?
The state parameter is documented in the schema, but response_format has only an enum and default with no explanation in either schema or description. With 50% schema description coverage, the description should compensate for the undocumented parameter but adds no parameter-level meaning.
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?
The description states a specific query: whether a state bar requires lawyers to file or submit ads for review, which ads, and when. It clearly identifies the resource and scope, though it omits the fees aspect promised by the title and does not differentiate itself from sibling tools.
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Usage Guidelines2/5
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
There is no explicit when-to-use guidance, no exclusions, and no alternatives named. The only implied usage is that the tool covers one state at a time.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
get_ad_platform_policiesAd-platform policies for law-firm adsBRead-onlyIdempotentInspect
What Google Ads, Local Services Ads, Microsoft, Meta, LinkedIn, YouTube and ChatGPT ads allow for law-firm ads: eligibility, verification, targeting, creative. Results are not legal advice.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| area | No | ||
| limit | No | Records per page (1 to 25) | |
| query | No | Words to match, e.g. "bail bonds" or "verification" | |
| cursor | No | The nextCursor from the previous page; leave out for the first… | |
| platform | No | ||
| response_format | No | concise |
Output Schema
| Name | Required | Description |
|---|---|---|
No output parameters | ||
TDQS
B3.4/5.0
Behavior3/5
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds the platform/topic scope and a non-legal-advice caveat, but says nothing about paging behavior (the limit/cursor pair) or what the returned policy records look like.
Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.
Conciseness5/5
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
Two sentences, zero waste, with the substantive scope front-loaded and the legal-advice caveat correctly demoted to the end.
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, so return-value detail is not needed, and annotations cover safety. The scope statement is sufficient to call it correctly; only the silent paging contract and lack of sibling routing keep it from being fully complete.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Parameters3/5
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
At 50% schema coverage, the description partially compensates: the platform list matches the platform enum exactly and the named areas (eligibility, verification, targeting, creative) map to several area enum values. It says nothing about the remaining areas (billing, appeals, ai-labelling, etc.), response_format, or how platform+area combine.
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?
Clearly identifies the resource: platform-by-platform policy content (eligibility, verification, targeting, creative) for law-firm advertising, naming all seven covered platforms. The verb is only implied ('What ... allow'), and it does not distinguish itself from overlapping siblings such as check_ad_elements or get_ad_filing_requirements.
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Usage Guidelines2/5
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
No statement of when to reach for this tool versus the many adjacent siblings in the list (get_ad_filing_requirements, check_ad_elements, get_state_rules). The only meta-line, 'Results are not legal advice,' is a disclaimer, not usage guidance.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
get_attorney_fee_capsLegal limits on attorney fees in one jurisdictionBRead-onlyIdempotentInspect
The fee-cap rules (percent and dollar limits on attorney fees) for one state or federal program: workers' comp, med-mal, contingency, SSDI, FTCA, VA. Results are not legal advice.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| program | No | ||
| jurisdiction | Yes | Two-letter state code, DC, or US for federal programs; full… | |
| response_format | No | concise |
Output Schema
| Name | Required | Description |
|---|---|---|
No output parameters | ||
TDQS
B3.2/5.0
Behavior3/5
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, openWorldHint=false and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds the content nature (percent and dollar limits) and the 'not legal advice' caveat, but says nothing about how program selection broadens or narrows results, or what a miss on a jurisdiction yields.
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?
One front-loaded sentence carries the resource, the unit of limits, and the program list; the disclaimer is short. No wasted clauses, though the program enumeration makes the sentence dense.
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?
With an output schema present, return values need not be described, and the annotations carry the safety profile, leaving little an agent must know to call it. The remaining gap is routing versus calculate_fee_cap and the undocumented response_format.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Parameters3/5
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
Schema coverage is only 33%, but the description does add meaning by naming the program families covered (workers' comp, med-mal, contingency, SSDI, FTCA, VA), which maps onto the program enum even if it omits longshore and other. The response_format parameter (concise vs detailed) is never explained, so the description only partly compensates 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?
The description states a specific resource and scope: fee-cap rules (percent and dollar limits) for one state or federal program, with the covered program families enumerated. It is clear what is returned, but it never contrasts itself with the calculate_fee_cap sibling, so an agent must infer the lookup-vs-compute split.
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Usage Guidelines2/5
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
There is no when-to-use guidance: nothing says to call this to find limits rather than calculate_fee_cap to apply them, nor how it relates to get_state_rules or search_rules. The closing sentence is a liability disclaimer ('not legal advice'), not usage direction.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
get_benchmarkLaw-firm marketing benchmarksBRead-onlyIdempotentInspect
Published benchmark tables on law-firm intake and marketing, as bands, tiers and rounded values with the methods page to cite.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| query | No | Optional words to keep only matching rows, e.g. "hour" or… | |
| table | No | ||
| response_format | No | concise |
Output Schema
| Name | Required | Description |
|---|---|---|
No output parameters | ||
TDQS
B3.1/5.0
Behavior4/5
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, destructiveHint=false and closed-world scope, so the safety profile is covered. The description still adds real value by disclosing that results are bands, tiers and rounded values rather than raw figures, and that a methods page exists to cite — context that affects how an agent should present and attribute the data.
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?
A single dense sentence with no filler, front-loading the content domain before the output-shape caveat. The phrasing 'with the methods page to cite' is slightly compressed but still earns its place as attribution guidance.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Completeness2/5
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
An output schema exists, so return values need not be explained. But a tool whose primary selector is a nine-value table enum with zero descriptions in either schema or prose is under-specified: the agent cannot reliably choose a table, and nothing indicates whether table is optional or what happens when it is omitted.
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 description coverage is only 33%: the query parameter is documented, but the nine-value table enum has no per-value descriptions anywhere, and the description does not mention any parameter. An agent must guess which table corresponds to 'speed-to-sign' versus 'lsa-lead-mix' or 'cost-per-signed-client' with no help from the prose.
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?
The description names the specific resource: published benchmark tables on law-firm intake and marketing, which distinguishes it from generic siblings like data_lookup or data_search. However, it is a noun phrase with no verb, so the retrieval action is only implied by the tool name rather than stated.
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Usage Guidelines2/5
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as data_lookup, data_search, or list_datasets, all of which could plausibly surface benchmark-style data. The description gives content, not routing logic.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
get_ca_court_filingsCalifornia court filings in one countyARead-onlyIdempotentInspect
California only: cases filed in one county's superior court (or CA for the whole state) in fiscal year 2024-25, by case type, with the prior year. Results are not legal advice.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| group | No | ||
| county | Yes | County name ("Los Angeles", "san-diego") or CA for the… | |
| response_format | No | concise |
Output Schema
| Name | Required | Description |
|---|---|---|
No output parameters | ||
TDQS
A3.6/5.0
Behavior3/5
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
The annotations already declare the operation as read-only, idempotent, non-destructive, and closed-world, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds useful temporal scope (fiscal year 2024-25 with prior year) and a legal disclaimer, but it does not disclose additional behavioral traits such as data update cadence, source lag, or output detail levels.
Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.
Conciseness5/5
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
The description is a single efficient sentence that front-loads the geographic and temporal scope, then adds the case-type breakdown and prior-year context. Every phrase earns its place with no redundant wording.
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?
Given a moderate three-parameter schema, an output schema, and annotations covering safety, the description supplies the key missing context: California-only scope, fiscal year, prior-year comparison, and the 'CA' statewide option. The main minor gap is that it does not explain the response_format parameter, but that enum is largely self-explanatory.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Parameters3/5
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
Schema description coverage is low at 33%, so the description should compensate for undocumented parameters. It does explain that 'county' can be a county name or 'CA' for the whole state and that results are broken down 'by case type', which maps to the group parameter, but it omits any explanation of response_format and does not elaborate on the group enum values.
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?
The description states a specific resource and scope: California county superior court case filings for fiscal year 2024-25, with case type and prior-year comparison. It is clear what the tool returns, but it does not explicitly name sibling tools or contrast itself with alternatives such as compare_states or get_state_market_brief.
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Usage Guidelines3/5
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
The phrase 'California only' and the 'CA' option establish a clear geographic usage constraint, implying when this tool is appropriate. However, it provides no explicit guidance on when to choose this tool over sibling tools that also deal with state-level data, and no exclusions beyond the California scope.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
get_ruleOne lawyer advertising rule in one stateBRead-onlyIdempotentInspect
One state's lawyer advertising rule on one topic, e.g. can a firm text leads, record intake calls, pay referral fees, what disclaimer every ad must include. Results are not legal advice.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| state | Yes | Two-letter code (TX), or DC. Full names (Texas) also work. | |
| topic | Yes | ||
| response_format | No | concise |
Output Schema
| Name | Required | Description |
|---|---|---|
No output parameters | ||
TDQS
B3.2/5.0
Behavior3/5
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already declare this a safe, idempotent, closed-world read, so the description needn't cover that. It adds a useful caveat ('Results are not legal advice') and the one-rule-per-state-topic granularity, but says nothing about what happens when a state lacks a rule for that topic or about jurisdiction coverage.
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?
One sentence plus a short caveat, front-loaded with the resource definition before the examples. The example list is a bit of a run-on but every element earns its place by disambiguating topics.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Completeness3/5
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
An output schema exists, so return values needn't be explained, and the read-only nature is covered by annotations. Still missing the no-rule-found behavior and any sense of how comprehensive the state/topic coverage is, which matters for a lookup tool an agent may call blindly.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Parameters3/5
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
Schema coverage is only 33%: state is documented, but topic is a bare enum and response_format is entirely undocumented. The examples partially compensate by mapping natural questions onto enum values (texting, recording, referral, disclaimer/requiredContent), but response_format's effect on output is left unexplained.
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 resource and scope: one state's lawyer advertising rule on one topic, with concrete example questions that make the resource tangible. It doesn't name a sibling, so the boundary against get_state_rules or search_rules must be inferred from the singular 'one rule' framing.
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Usage Guidelines2/5
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
No statement of when to use this instead of search_rules, get_state_rules, or compare_states, which are the obvious alternatives. The examples imply a known state+topic lookup but never say so or exclude the search path.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
get_spanish_demand_supplySpanish-language legal demand and lawyer supply in one areaARead-onlyIdempotentInspect
Spanish speakers with limited English per Spanish-speaking lawyer in one US state, DC, the US or a metro area (Census ACS). Results are not legal advice.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| area | Yes | A state code (TX), DC, US, a metro code (26420), or a metro… | |
| response_format | No | concise |
Output Schema
| Name | Required | Description |
|---|---|---|
No output parameters | ||
TDQS
A3.5/5.0
Behavior4/5
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, non-destructive and closed-world, so safety is covered. The description adds genuine context beyond that: the upstream source (Census ACS) and a framing constraint ('Results are not legal advice') that tells the agent how to present the number. It does not discuss rounding, staleness, or rate limits, which keeps it out of the top tier.
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?
A single front-loaded sentence defines the metric and scope, followed by a short source note and a one-clause disclaimer. No padding; the only slack is that the geography list could be compressed since the schema repeats it.
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?
For a two-parameter read whose output schema already defines return values, the description supplies metric definition, data source, geographic scope, and an output caveat — enough to call it correctly. The remaining hole is the unmentioned response_format, which is a parameter-level rather than description-level omission.
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?
With only 50% schema coverage, the description needs to compensate and does not. It restates the accepted geography forms (partially duplicating the truncated 'area' description) but never mentions the 'response_format' parameter at all — the enum, its default, and what changes between concise and detailed are left entirely undocumented.
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?
Names a precise, unusual metric (Spanish speakers with limited English per Spanish-speaking lawyer) and enumerates every supported geography type (state code, DC, US, metro), plus the data source (Census ACS). An agent can tell exactly what this returns; it simply does not explicitly contrast itself with siblings like data_lookup or compare_states, though the metric is distinctive enough among them.
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Usage Guidelines3/5
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
Usage is only implied: the geography enumeration hints that this is the single-area lookup for this metric, but there is no when-to-use statement, no guidance on picking this over compare_states/data_lookup, and no prerequisite or exclusion notes.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
get_state_market_briefLaw-firm market brief for one stateBRead-onlyIdempotentInspect
Every public number about marketing a law firm in one state or DC, joined from seven open datasets. Results are not legal advice.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| state | Yes | Two-letter code (TX) or DC; full names (Texas) also work | |
| response_format | No | concise |
Output Schema
| Name | Required | Description |
|---|---|---|
No output parameters | ||
TDQS
B3/5.0
Behavior3/5
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already declare read-only, idempotent, non-destructive, and closed-world behavior. The description adds provenance (seven open datasets) and a useful disclaimer ('not legal advice'), but says nothing about how response_format changes output or how the seven datasets are joined/limited.
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?
Two short sentences with no filler; the scope constraint leads. The opening clause ('Every public number about...') is slightly awkward but earns its place by signaling breadth.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Completeness3/5
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
An output schema exists, so return-shape detail isn't required, and the safety profile is covered by annotations. However, the undocumented response_format parameter leaves a real decision an agent cannot make from the description, so the definition is only adequate.
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 50%: 'state' is documented in the schema, but 'response_format' has no description anywhere – only an enum and a default. The description does not compensate at all, never mentioning the concise/detailed switch or its effect.
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 resource ('public number about marketing a law firm in one state or DC') and its provenance (joined from seven open datasets). The 'one state or DC' scope implicitly separates it from siblings like compare_states, though it never names them explicitly.
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Usage Guidelines2/5
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
No when-to-use, when-not, or alternatives are given. An agent must infer that this is the single-state brief versus compare_states or get_benchmark from the phrase 'one state' alone.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
get_state_rulesLawyer advertising rules for one stateBRead-onlyIdempotentInspect
Every lawyer advertising rule for one US state or DC in one call: filing, disclaimers, waiting periods, claims, referrals, language, recording, texting, privacy. Results are not legal advice.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| state | Yes | Two-letter code (TX), or DC. Full names (Texas) also work. | |
| response_format | No | concise |
Output Schema
| Name | Required | Description |
|---|---|---|
No output parameters | ||
TDQS
B3.3/5.0
Behavior3/5
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already establish that this is a safe, read-only, idempotent, non-destructive lookup. The description adds a useful disclaimer that results are not legal advice and signals complete one-call retrieval, but it does not discuss freshness, ordering, rate limits, or unsupported-state behavior.
Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.
Conciseness5/5
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
The description is front-loaded with the core purpose, followed by a compact list of covered rule categories. The legal-advice disclaimer is brief and relevant, and there is no wasted text.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Completeness3/5
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
Given the annotations and output schema, the description does not need to explain return values or safety behavior. It adequately describes the domain and scope, but it leaves important gaps around response_format semantics and routing relative to sibling tools.
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?
The schema already fully documents the required state parameter, including two-letter codes, DC, and full names. The description reinforces that scope only weakly, and it does not explain the optional response_format parameter or how concise versus detailed output differs.
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?
The description gives a specific resource and scope: every lawyer advertising rule for one US state or DC. It also lists covered topics, making the tool's purpose clear. It distinguishes itself somewhat by emphasizing 'one state or DC in one call,' but it does not explicitly name siblings like get_rule or search_rules.
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Usage Guidelines3/5
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
The phrase 'in one call' implies this is for comprehensive state-level rule retrieval rather than single-rule lookup. However, there is no explicit guidance on when to use this versus get_rule, search_rules, compare_states, or get_ad_filing_requirements.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
list_datasetsList the datasetsBRead-onlyIdempotentInspect
Every public dataset on this server: what it covers, its version, DOI, license (CC BY 4.0), credit line, last-checked date, the page to cite, its files and its tools.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| response_format | No | concise |
Output Schema
| Name | Required | Description |
|---|---|---|
No output parameters | ||
TDQS
B3.2/5.0
Behavior3/5
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already declare readOnly, idempotent, closed-world and non-destructive, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds the useful scope claim that the listing is exhaustive across all public datasets, but it says nothing about the concise-vs-detailed response behavior, which is the one trait an agent actually needs here.
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?
A single front-loaded sentence with no filler; the resource scope leads and the field inventory follows. It is dense but every clause is informative.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Completeness3/5
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
An output schema exists, so spending the entire description enumerating return fields is partly redundant, while the genuinely ambiguous element — what response_format changes — goes unaddressed. The definition is adequate to call the tool but leaves the only parameter unexplained.
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 description coverage is 0% for the single response_format parameter, so the description must compensate and does not — it never mentions that output can be trimmed to concise or expanded to detailed. The enum values are largely self-explanatory, but the description's framing ('what it covers, its version, DOI, license...') implies the full field set is always returned, which mildly misleads about the default.
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?
The description names the resource precisely ('Every public dataset on this server') and enumerates the fields each entry carries (version, DOI, license, credit line, files, tools), so an agent can tell this is the catalog-listing tool rather than a data-retrieval tool. It does not explicitly contrast itself with siblings like data_search or data_lookup, which keeps it out of 5 territory.
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Usage Guidelines3/5
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
Usage is only implied: an agent can infer this is the discovery/enumeration entry point before drilling into data_search or data_lookup, but the description never states when to use this versus those siblings or any prerequisite. No exclusions or alternatives are given.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
list_mdl_docketsFederal MDL dockets by actions pendingBRead-onlyIdempotentInspect
Federal multidistrict litigation (MDL) dockets from the Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation's monthly pending-dockets reports, largest first. Results are not legal advice.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| limit | No | Records per page (1 to 25) | |
| query | No | Words in the docket title or court, e.g. "hernia mesh" | |
| cursor | No | The nextCursor from the previous page; leave out for the first… | |
| docket | No | One docket, e.g. MDL-2738 or 2738; returns its monthly history | |
| response_format | No | concise |
Output Schema
| Name | Required | Description |
|---|---|---|
No output parameters | ||
TDQS
B3.2/5.0
Behavior3/5
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already declare readOnly, idempotent, non-destructive, and closed-world, so the safety profile is covered. The description usefully adds provenance and ordering, but omits pagination behavior despite a `cursor` parameter, and says nothing about result volume limits or what the monthly history mode returns.
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?
One front-loaded sentence carries source, scope, and ordering, with the legal disclaimer kept short. No filler or redundancy; slightly more could be spent on usage routing instead of the disclaimer.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Completeness3/5
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
An output schema exists, so return values needn't be explained, and annotations cover the safety profile. However, for a five-parameter tool with a paginated/dual-mode design, the description omits pagination flow and when to prefer `query` over `docket` — gaps an agent would hit in practice.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Parameters3/5
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
Schema description coverage is 80%, so the schema already explains `limit`, `query`, `cursor`, and `docket` including the MDL-2738 pattern. The description adds nothing about parameters — only the implicit sort order from 'largest first'. Baseline 3 applies when the schema does the heavy lifting.
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?
Names a specific resource (federal MDL dockets) and its authoritative source (JPML monthly pending-dockets reports), plus the sort order (largest first). It is clearly distinguishable from every sibling, none of which deal with MDL data. The verb is only implied, but 'dockets ... largest first' makes the list semantics obvious.
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Usage Guidelines2/5
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
No guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, nor on the two distinct modes the schema exposes (browse/paginate all dockets vs. pass `docket` for one docket's monthly history vs. `query` for title/court matching). The agent must infer all routing from the schema alone.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
list_rule_changesConfirmed changes to the rulesARead-onlyIdempotentInspect
Recent confirmed changes to state lawyer advertising rules only, newest first, with the date, state, rules touched and primary source of each.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| since | No | Only changes on or after this day | |
| response_format | No | concise |
Output Schema
| Name | Required | Description |
|---|---|---|
No output parameters | ||
TDQS
A3.8/5.0
Behavior4/5
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already cover readOnly/idempotent/non-destructive, so the description's added value is the ordering ('newest first'), the admission filter ('confirmed' only, advertising rules only), and the per-item contents (date, state, rules touched, primary source). That is useful context beyond the annotations, though it doesn't say how far back the feed reaches or what 'confirmed' means procedurally.
Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.
Conciseness5/5
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
A single front-loaded sentence that states scope, filter, ordering, and return contents with no filler. Nothing is redundant or wasted.
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?
With annotations covering safety and an output schema covering the return shape, the description only needs to convey scope and ordering, which it does. The remaining gaps are minor: the default time window when 'since' is omitted, and the semantics of 'confirmed'.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Parameters3/5
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
The description mentions no parameters at all. Schema coverage is 50%: 'since' is well documented in the schema itself, while 'response_format' has an enum but no explanation of how 'detailed' differs from 'concise'. The self-explanatory enum keeps this at a baseline-adjacent 3 rather than lower.
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?
A specific verb+resource ('list' + 'confirmed changes to state lawyer advertising rules'), with scope narrowed to recent/confirmed items and an explicit ordering (newest first). It implicitly distinguishes itself from get_rule/search_rules by being a change feed rather than a rule lookup, but never names a sibling, so it falls short of a 5.
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Usage Guidelines3/5
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
Usage is only implied: an agent infers this is a 'what changed lately' tool, but there is no explicit statement of when to use it versus get_state_rules, search_rules, or whats_new. No exclusions or prerequisites are stated.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
searchSearch the legal-marketing recordsARead-onlyIdempotentInspect
Id search for deep-research clients: returns ids, titles and URLs to read with fetch; the named tools answer one question directly.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| query | Yes | For example "Texas ad filing" or "pay per lead ethics opinion" |
Output Schema
| Name | Required | Description |
|---|---|---|
No output parameters | ||
TDQS
A3.9/5.0
Behavior4/5
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already cover safety (readOnly, idempotent, non-destructive, closed world), so the added value is the disclosure that this returns only ids/titles/URLs and requires a follow-up fetch — a genuinely useful behavioral trait. It does not mention limits on result count or ranking, but the core workflow behavior is disclosed.
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?
A single compact sentence covering purpose, output, follow-up step, and the alternative path — nothing redundant. The phrasing 'Id search for deep-research clients' is slightly compressed/jargony, which costs a point on readability.
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?
For a one-parameter lookup with an output schema and full annotation coverage, the description supplies what matters: the discovery-then-fetch pattern and the alternative path. Missing only the scope of the underlying corpus and any result-limit expectations.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Parameters3/5
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
Schema coverage is 100% and the schema already gives example queries and length bounds, so the parameter is fully documented without the description. The description adds no guidance on query formulation, so baseline 3 applies.
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?
The description states the operation is an ID search and specifies the return shape (ids, titles, URLs), and it distinguishes itself from the named tools by role (ID discovery vs. direct answers). It never says what corpus is being searched, leaving the title ('legal-marketing records') to carry that, so it falls short of fully self-contained clarity.
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?
It sets up a clear two-step workflow (search here, then read with fetch) and signals when not to use it: 'the named tools answer one question directly.' The reference to 'named tools' is collective rather than naming specific siblings like search_rules, search_ethics_opinions, or data_search, so the agent must infer which alternative applies.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
search_ethics_opinionsBar ethics opinions on lawyer marketingBRead-onlyIdempotentInspect
Bar ethics opinions (ABA and state) on lawyer marketing, e.g. pay-per-lead, Google reviews, AI chatbots, referral fees, social media. Results are not legal advice.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| limit | No | Records per page (1 to 25) | |
| query | No | Words to match, e.g. "Google reviews" or "pay per lead" | |
| state | No | Two-letter code, DC, or ABA for the American Bar Association | |
| topic | No | One of 27 values, e.g. advertising-general, fee-sharing, trade-names | |
| cursor | No | The nextCursor from the previous page; leave out for the first… | |
| in_force_only | No | Leave out opinions marked withdrawn or superseded | |
| response_format | No | concise |
Output Schema
| Name | Required | Description |
|---|---|---|
No output parameters | ||
TDQS
B3.3/5.0
Behavior3/5
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, destructiveHint=false and openWorldHint=false, so the safety profile is fully covered and the description adds little on that axis. It does contribute the domain boundary (ABA plus state bars) and the non-legal-advice caveat, but says nothing about result volume, ranking, or how pagination interacts with the cursor parameter.
Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.
Conciseness5/5
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
Two sentences, front-loaded with the resource and scope, with the disclaimer placed last where it belongs. Every clause carries information; there is no filler or restatement of the title.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Completeness3/5
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
An output schema exists and 86% of parameters are documented, so the description needn't explain returns. However, with seven parameters and zero required ones, the description never says what a call with no filters returns or which filters combine, which is a meaningful gap for a fully-optional search tool.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Parameters3/5
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
Schema description coverage is 86%, so nearly every parameter is already documented in the schema, including query examples, the state/ABA convention, and cursor semantics. The description adds no parameter-level meaning beyond that, which is the expected baseline when the schema does the work.
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?
The description names a specific resource (bar ethics opinions from ABA and state bars) and constrains it to lawyer marketing, with concrete example topics (pay-per-lead, Google reviews, AI chatbots, referral fees, social media). An agent can tell this apart from search_rules or get_rule by subject matter, though the verb itself is only implied by the tool name rather than stated.
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Usage Guidelines2/5
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
There is no statement of when to use this versus siblings such as search_rules, get_rule, or search, nor any exclusion criteria. The only guidance-like sentence, 'Results are not legal advice,' is a disclaimer rather than a usage rule, so the agent must infer routing from the name and topic examples alone.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
search_rulesSearch the lawyer advertising rulesBRead-onlyIdempotentInspect
Keyword search across all rule text, for a word or claim such as "expert" or "guaranteed results". Results are not legal advice.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| limit | No | ||
| query | Yes | For example "Florida filing fee" or "expert" | |
| response_format | No | concise |
Output Schema
| Name | Required | Description |
|---|---|---|
No output parameters | ||
TDQS
B3.3/5.0
Behavior3/5
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already declare readOnly, idempotent, non-destructive and closed-world, so the safety profile is fully covered. The description adds a scope statement ("across ALL rule text") and a disclaimer that results are not legal advice, but says nothing about result ordering, pagination, or how many rules are matched by default beyond what annotations and the output schema already imply.
Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.
Conciseness5/5
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
Two short sentences, front-loaded with the action and scope, with the example terms immediately illustrating acceptable input. No filler; the disclaimer is one clause.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Completeness3/5
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
An output schema exists, so return-value shape need not be explained, and the annotations cover side effects. Still, for a 3-parameter search tool the description leaves the agent guessing about result count/truncation behavior (`limit`, capped at 25) and what `response_format` changes, which are the practical decision points when calling it.
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 33%: only `query` carries a schema description, and the description's examples for it largely duplicate that. Neither `limit` (max 25, default 5) nor `response_format` (concise vs. detailed) is mentioned in the description, so with sub-50% coverage the description fails to compensate for the undocumented parameters.
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?
The description gives a specific verb+resource (keyword search across all rule text) and clarifies scope with concrete example terms like "expert" and "guaranteed results", which makes the intended query type unambiguous. It does not name or exclude any of the numerous search-adjacent siblings (search, search_ethics_opinions, get_rule, get_state_rules), so the agent must infer that this is the rule-text-wide search rather than a targeted lookup.
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Usage Guidelines3/5
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
Usage is implied only through the example claims ("expert", "guaranteed results"), which suggests the tool is for checking whether ad copy language appears in the rules. There is no statement of when to prefer it over get_rule, get_state_rules, or search_ethics_opinions, and no exclusions or preconditions.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
whats_newWhat changedBRead-onlyIdempotentInspect
What changed lately in any of the datasets (or only the datasets named), newest first, with the date and source of each. Optional since (YYYY-MM-DD).
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| limit | No | ||
| since | No | ||
| datasets | No | ||
| response_format | No | concise |
Output Schema
| Name | Required | Description |
|---|---|---|
No output parameters | ||
TDQS
B3.1/5.0
Behavior3/5
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, non-destructive and closed-world, so safety is fully covered structurally. The description adds genuine behavioral content beyond that: result ordering is newest-first and each entry carries date and source. It says nothing about the size of the feed, pagination, or what 'source' means per entry.
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?
Two tight sentences with no filler, and the core capability plus ordering is front-loaded ahead of the filter detail. The backticked parameter names are slightly noisy but cost nothing in length.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Completeness2/5
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
An output schema exists, so return-value detail is not required. However, for a four-parameter tool with zero schema descriptions, the description should have covered `limit` (default 5 — an agent could reasonably assume it gets everything) and `response_format`. Those omissions make it incomplete enough to risk a miscall.
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 description coverage is 0%, so the description carries the full burden. It mentions only `since` (already fully constrained by the schema's regex pattern) and alludes to `datasets`. The `limit` parameter with its default of 5 and max of 100 goes unmentioned, as does `response_format` (concise vs detailed) — two of four parameters are undocumented in both places.
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: reports what changed across datasets, with scoping via the `datasets` filter, ordered newest first, each item carrying date and source. An agent can immediately tell this is a change-feed tool. It does not name a sibling to contrast with (e.g. list_rule_changes, which is rules-only), which would have pushed it to a 5.
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Usage Guidelines3/5
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
Usage is implied by 'what changed lately' plus the optional `since` bound, so an agent can infer a recency-scoped listing. But there is no explicit when-to-use/when-not-to-use, and no routing to the near-siblings list_rule_changes or data_compare that overlap this territory.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Tool Schema Changelog
Recent tool additions, removals, and schema changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
5 tool updates
- Changed
cite1 field changed- changed
Input schema / properties / dataset / enumPrevious value: -[ - "rules", - "bankruptcy", - "bar-pipeline", - "benchmarks", - "ca-courts", - "civil-filings", - "consumer-complaints", - "consumer-sentinel", - "criminal-filings", - "crosswalks", - "deserts", - "disability-hearings", - "eeoc-charges", - "fatal-crashes", - "fees", - "filing", - "idb-civil", - "immigration-courts", - "language", - "law-firm-economy", - "law-offices", - "lawyer-wages", - "legal-need", - "legal-prices", - "limitations", - "mdl", - "nursing-homes", - "opinions", - "platforms", - "referral", - "robocall-complaints", - "state-courts", - "truck-crashes", - "va-compensation", - "vehicle-complaints", - "veterans-representation", - "wage-enforcement", - "work-injuries" -]New value: +[ + "rules", + "bankruptcy", + "bar-pipeline", + "benchmarks", + "ca-courts", + "civil-filings", + "consumer-complaints", + "consumer-sentinel", + "criminal-filings", + "crosswalks", + "deserts", + "disability-hearings", + "eeoc-charges", + "fatal-crashes", + "fees", + "filing", + "findings", + "idb-civil", + "immigration-courts", + "language", + "law-firm-economy", + "law-offices", + "lawyer-wages", + "legal-need", + "legal-prices", + "limitations", + "mdl", + "nursing-homes", + "opinions", + "platforms", + "referral", + "robocall-complaints", + "state-courts", + "truck-crashes", + "va-compensation", + "vehicle-complaints", + "veterans-representation", + "wage-enforcement", + "work-injuries" +]
- Changed
data_compare1 field changed- changed
Input schema / properties / dataset / enumPrevious value: -[ - "bankruptcy", - "bar-pipeline", - "benchmarks", - "ca-courts", - "civil-filings", - "consumer-complaints", - "consumer-sentinel", - "criminal-filings", - "crosswalks", - "deserts", - "disability-hearings", - "eeoc-charges", - "fatal-crashes", - "fees", - "filing", - "idb-civil", - "immigration-courts", - "language", - "law-firm-economy", - "law-offices", - "lawyer-wages", - "legal-need", - "legal-prices", - "limitations", - "mdl", - "nursing-homes", - "opinions", - "platforms", - "referral", - "robocall-complaints", - "state-courts", - "truck-crashes", - "va-compensation", - "vehicle-complaints", - "veterans-representation", - "wage-enforcement", - "work-injuries" -]New value: +[ + "bankruptcy", + "bar-pipeline", + "benchmarks", + "ca-courts", + "civil-filings", + "consumer-complaints", + "consumer-sentinel", + "criminal-filings", + "crosswalks", + "deserts", + "disability-hearings", + "eeoc-charges", + "fatal-crashes", + "fees", + "filing", + "findings", + "idb-civil", + "immigration-courts", + "language", + "law-firm-economy", + "law-offices", + "lawyer-wages", + "legal-need", + "legal-prices", + "limitations", + "mdl", + "nursing-homes", + "opinions", + "platforms", + "referral", + "robocall-complaints", + "state-courts", + "truck-crashes", + "va-compensation", + "vehicle-complaints", + "veterans-representation", + "wage-enforcement", + "work-injuries" +]
- Changed
data_lookup1 field changed- changed
Input schema / properties / dataset / enumPrevious value: -[ - "bankruptcy", - "bar-pipeline", - "benchmarks", - "ca-courts", - "civil-filings", - "consumer-complaints", - "consumer-sentinel", - "criminal-filings", - "crosswalks", - "deserts", - "disability-hearings", - "eeoc-charges", - "fatal-crashes", - "fees", - "filing", - "idb-civil", - "immigration-courts", - "language", - "law-firm-economy", - "law-offices", - "lawyer-wages", - "legal-need", - "legal-prices", - "limitations", - "mdl", - "nursing-homes", - "opinions", - "platforms", - "referral", - "robocall-complaints", - "state-courts", - "truck-crashes", - "va-compensation", - "vehicle-complaints", - "veterans-representation", - "wage-enforcement", - "work-injuries" -]New value: +[ + "bankruptcy", + "bar-pipeline", + "benchmarks", + "ca-courts", + "civil-filings", + "consumer-complaints", + "consumer-sentinel", + "criminal-filings", + "crosswalks", + "deserts", + "disability-hearings", + "eeoc-charges", + "fatal-crashes", + "fees", + "filing", + "findings", + "idb-civil", + "immigration-courts", + "language", + "law-firm-economy", + "law-offices", + "lawyer-wages", + "legal-need", + "legal-prices", + "limitations", + "mdl", + "nursing-homes", + "opinions", + "platforms", + "referral", + "robocall-complaints", + "state-courts", + "truck-crashes", + "va-compensation", + "vehicle-complaints", + "veterans-representation", + "wage-enforcement", + "work-injuries" +]
- Changed
data_search1 field changed- changed
Input schema / properties / datasets / items / enumPrevious value: -[ - "bankruptcy", - "bar-pipeline", - "benchmarks", - "ca-courts", - "civil-filings", - "consumer-complaints", - "consumer-sentinel", - "criminal-filings", - "crosswalks", - "deserts", - "disability-hearings", - "eeoc-charges", - "fatal-crashes", - "fees", - "filing", - "idb-civil", - "immigration-courts", - "language", - "law-firm-economy", - "law-offices", - "lawyer-wages", - "legal-need", - "legal-prices", - "limitations", - "mdl", - "nursing-homes", - "opinions", - "platforms", - "referral", - "robocall-complaints", - "state-courts", - "truck-crashes", - "va-compensation", - "vehicle-complaints", - "veterans-representation", - "wage-enforcement", - "work-injuries" -]New value: +[ + "bankruptcy", + "bar-pipeline", + "benchmarks", + "ca-courts", + "civil-filings", + "consumer-complaints", + "consumer-sentinel", + "criminal-filings", + "crosswalks", + "deserts", + "disability-hearings", + "eeoc-charges", + "fatal-crashes", + "fees", + "filing", + "findings", + "idb-civil", + "immigration-courts", + "language", + "law-firm-economy", + "law-offices", + "lawyer-wages", + "legal-need", + "legal-prices", + "limitations", + "mdl", + "nursing-homes", + "opinions", + "platforms", + "referral", + "robocall-complaints", + "state-courts", + "truck-crashes", + "va-compensation", + "vehicle-complaints", + "veterans-representation", + "wage-enforcement", + "work-injuries" +]
- Changed
whats_new1 field changed- changed
Input schema / properties / datasets / items / enumPrevious value: -[ - "rules", - "bankruptcy", - "bar-pipeline", - "benchmarks", - "ca-courts", - "civil-filings", - "consumer-complaints", - "consumer-sentinel", - "criminal-filings", - "crosswalks", - "deserts", - "disability-hearings", - "eeoc-charges", - "fatal-crashes", - "fees", - "filing", - "idb-civil", - "immigration-courts", - "language", - "law-firm-economy", - "law-offices", - "lawyer-wages", - "legal-need", - "legal-prices", - "limitations", - "mdl", - "nursing-homes", - "opinions", - "platforms", - "referral", - "robocall-complaints", - "state-courts", - "truck-crashes", - "va-compensation", - "vehicle-complaints", - "veterans-representation", - "wage-enforcement", - "work-injuries" -]New value: +[ + "rules", + "bankruptcy", + "bar-pipeline", + "benchmarks", + "ca-courts", + "civil-filings", + "consumer-complaints", + "consumer-sentinel", + "criminal-filings", + "crosswalks", + "deserts", + "disability-hearings", + "eeoc-charges", + "fatal-crashes", + "fees", + "filing", + "findings", + "idb-civil", + "immigration-courts", + "language", + "law-firm-economy", + "law-offices", + "lawyer-wages", + "legal-need", + "legal-prices", + "limitations", + "mdl", + "nursing-homes", + "opinions", + "platforms", + "referral", + "robocall-complaints", + "state-courts", + "truck-crashes", + "va-compensation", + "vehicle-complaints", + "veterans-representation", + "wage-enforcement", + "work-injuries" +]
22 tool updates
- Changed
calculate_fee_cap2 fields changed- removed
Input schema / properties / detailRemoved value: -{ - "default": "summary", - "enum": [ - "summary", - "full" - ], - "type": "string" -} - added
Input schema / properties / response_formatAdded value: +{ + "default": "concise", + "enum": [ + "concise", + "detailed" + ], + "type": "string" +}
- Changed
check_ad_elements2 fields changed- removed
Input schema / properties / detailRemoved value: -{ - "default": "summary", - "enum": [ - "summary", - "full" - ], - "type": "string" -} - added
Input schema / properties / response_formatAdded value: +{ + "default": "concise", + "enum": [ + "concise", + "detailed" + ], + "type": "string" +}
- Changed
cite2 fields changed- removed
Input schema / properties / detailRemoved value: -{ - "default": "summary", - "enum": [ - "summary", - "full" - ], - "type": "string" -} - added
Input schema / properties / response_formatAdded value: +{ + "default": "concise", + "enum": [ + "concise", + "detailed" + ], + "type": "string" +}
- Changed
compare_states2 fields changed- removed
Input schema / properties / detailRemoved value: -{ - "default": "summary", - "enum": [ - "summary", - "full" - ], - "type": "string" -} - added
Input schema / properties / response_formatAdded value: +{ + "default": "concise", + "enum": [ + "concise", + "detailed" + ], + "type": "string" +}
- Changed
data_compare2 fields changed- removed
Input schema / properties / detailRemoved value: -{ - "default": "summary", - "enum": [ - "summary", - "full" - ], - "type": "string" -} - added
Input schema / properties / response_formatAdded value: +{ + "default": "concise", + "enum": [ + "concise", + "detailed" + ], + "type": "string" +}
- Changed
data_lookup2 fields changed- removed
Input schema / properties / detailRemoved value: -{ - "default": "summary", - "enum": [ - "summary", - "full" - ], - "type": "string" -} - added
Input schema / properties / response_formatAdded value: +{ + "default": "concise", + "enum": [ + "concise", + "detailed" + ], + "type": "string" +}
- Changed
data_search2 fields changed- removed
Input schema / properties / detailRemoved value: -{ - "default": "summary", - "enum": [ - "summary", - "full" - ], - "type": "string" -} - added
Input schema / properties / response_formatAdded value: +{ + "default": "concise", + "enum": [ + "concise", + "detailed" + ], + "type": "string" +}
- Changed
get_ad_filing_requirements2 fields changed- removed
Input schema / properties / detailRemoved value: -{ - "default": "summary", - "enum": [ - "summary", - "full" - ], - "type": "string" -} - added
Input schema / properties / response_formatAdded value: +{ + "default": "concise", + "enum": [ + "concise", + "detailed" + ], + "type": "string" +}
- Changed
get_ad_platform_policies2 fields changed- removed
Input schema / properties / detailRemoved value: -{ - "default": "summary", - "enum": [ - "summary", - "full" - ], - "type": "string" -} - added
Input schema / properties / response_formatAdded value: +{ + "default": "concise", + "enum": [ + "concise", + "detailed" + ], + "type": "string" +}
- Changed
get_attorney_fee_caps2 fields changed- removed
Input schema / properties / detailRemoved value: -{ - "default": "summary", - "enum": [ - "summary", - "full" - ], - "type": "string" -} - added
Input schema / properties / response_formatAdded value: +{ + "default": "concise", + "enum": [ + "concise", + "detailed" + ], + "type": "string" +}
- Changed
get_benchmark2 fields changed- removed
Input schema / properties / detailRemoved value: -{ - "default": "summary", - "enum": [ - "summary", - "full" - ], - "type": "string" -} - added
Input schema / properties / response_formatAdded value: +{ + "default": "concise", + "enum": [ + "concise", + "detailed" + ], + "type": "string" +}
- Changed
get_ca_court_filings2 fields changed- removed
Input schema / properties / detailRemoved value: -{ - "default": "summary", - "enum": [ - "summary", - "full" - ], - "type": "string" -} - added
Input schema / properties / response_formatAdded value: +{ + "default": "concise", + "enum": [ + "concise", + "detailed" + ], + "type": "string" +}
- Changed
get_rule2 fields changed- removed
Input schema / properties / detailRemoved value: -{ - "default": "summary", - "enum": [ - "summary", - "full" - ], - "type": "string" -} - added
Input schema / properties / response_formatAdded value: +{ + "default": "concise", + "enum": [ + "concise", + "detailed" + ], + "type": "string" +}
- Changed
get_spanish_demand_supply2 fields changed- removed
Input schema / properties / detailRemoved value: -{ - "default": "summary", - "enum": [ - "summary", - "full" - ], - "type": "string" -} - added
Input schema / properties / response_formatAdded value: +{ + "default": "concise", + "enum": [ + "concise", + "detailed" + ], + "type": "string" +}
- Changed
get_state_market_brief2 fields changed- removed
Input schema / properties / detailRemoved value: -{ - "default": "summary", - "enum": [ - "summary", - "full" - ], - "type": "string" -} - added
Input schema / properties / response_formatAdded value: +{ + "default": "concise", + "enum": [ + "concise", + "detailed" + ], + "type": "string" +}
- Changed
get_state_rules2 fields changed- removed
Input schema / properties / detailRemoved value: -{ - "default": "summary", - "enum": [ - "summary", - "full" - ], - "type": "string" -} - added
Input schema / properties / response_formatAdded value: +{ + "default": "concise", + "enum": [ + "concise", + "detailed" + ], + "type": "string" +}
- Changed
list_datasets2 fields changed- removed
Input schema / properties / detailRemoved value: -{ - "default": "summary", - "enum": [ - "summary", - "full" - ], - "type": "string" -} - added
Input schema / properties / response_formatAdded value: +{ + "default": "concise", + "enum": [ + "concise", + "detailed" + ], + "type": "string" +}
- Changed
list_mdl_dockets2 fields changed- removed
Input schema / properties / detailRemoved value: -{ - "default": "summary", - "enum": [ - "summary", - "full" - ], - "type": "string" -} - added
Input schema / properties / response_formatAdded value: +{ + "default": "concise", + "enum": [ + "concise", + "detailed" + ], + "type": "string" +}
- Changed
list_rule_changes2 fields changed- removed
Input schema / properties / detailRemoved value: -{ - "default": "summary", - "enum": [ - "summary", - "full" - ], - "type": "string" -} - added
Input schema / properties / response_formatAdded value: +{ + "default": "concise", + "enum": [ + "concise", + "detailed" + ], + "type": "string" +}
- Changed
search_ethics_opinions2 fields changed- removed
Input schema / properties / detailRemoved value: -{ - "default": "summary", - "enum": [ - "summary", - "full" - ], - "type": "string" -} - added
Input schema / properties / response_formatAdded value: +{ + "default": "concise", + "enum": [ + "concise", + "detailed" + ], + "type": "string" +}
- Changed
search_rules3 fields changed- removed
Input schema / properties / detailRemoved value: -{ - "default": "summary", - "enum": [ - "summary", - "full" - ], - "type": "string" -} - changed
Input schema / properties / query / descriptionPrevious value: -"For example \"Florida filing fee\" or \"testimonials in New York\""New value: +"For example \"Florida filing fee\" or \"expert\"" - added
Input schema / properties / response_formatAdded value: +{ + "default": "concise", + "enum": [ + "concise", + "detailed" + ], + "type": "string" +}
- Changed
whats_new2 fields changed- removed
Input schema / properties / detailRemoved value: -{ - "default": "summary", - "enum": [ - "summary", - "full" - ], - "type": "string" -} - added
Input schema / properties / response_formatAdded value: +{ + "default": "concise", + "enum": [ + "concise", + "detailed" + ], + "type": "string" +}
5 tool updates
- Changed
cite1 field changed- changed
Input schema / properties / dataset / enumPrevious value: -[ - "rules", - "bankruptcy", - "bar-pipeline", - "benchmarks", - "ca-courts", - "civil-filings", - "consumer-complaints", - "consumer-sentinel", - "crosswalks", - "deserts", - "disability-hearings", - "eeoc-charges", - "fatal-crashes", - "fees", - "filing", - "idb-civil", - "immigration-courts", - "language", - "law-firm-economy", - "law-offices", - "lawyer-wages", - "legal-need", - "legal-prices", - "limitations", - "mdl", - "nursing-homes", - "opinions", - "platforms", - "referral", - "robocall-complaints", - "state-courts", - "truck-crashes", - "veterans-representation", - "work-injuries" -]New value: +[ + "rules", + "bankruptcy", + "bar-pipeline", + "benchmarks", + "ca-courts", + "civil-filings", + "consumer-complaints", + "consumer-sentinel", + "criminal-filings", + "crosswalks", + "deserts", + "disability-hearings", + "eeoc-charges", + "fatal-crashes", + "fees", + "filing", + "idb-civil", + "immigration-courts", + "language", + "law-firm-economy", + "law-offices", + "lawyer-wages", + "legal-need", + "legal-prices", + "limitations", + "mdl", + "nursing-homes", + "opinions", + "platforms", + "referral", + "robocall-complaints", + "state-courts", + "truck-crashes", + "va-compensation", + "vehicle-complaints", + "veterans-representation", + "wage-enforcement", + "work-injuries" +]
- Changed
data_compare1 field changed- changed
Input schema / properties / dataset / enumPrevious value: -[ - "bankruptcy", - "bar-pipeline", - "benchmarks", - "ca-courts", - "civil-filings", - "consumer-complaints", - "consumer-sentinel", - "crosswalks", - "deserts", - "disability-hearings", - "eeoc-charges", - "fatal-crashes", - "fees", - "filing", - "idb-civil", - "immigration-courts", - "language", - "law-firm-economy", - "law-offices", - "lawyer-wages", - "legal-need", - "legal-prices", - "limitations", - "mdl", - "nursing-homes", - "opinions", - "platforms", - "referral", - "robocall-complaints", - "state-courts", - "truck-crashes", - "veterans-representation", - "work-injuries" -]New value: +[ + "bankruptcy", + "bar-pipeline", + "benchmarks", + "ca-courts", + "civil-filings", + "consumer-complaints", + "consumer-sentinel", + "criminal-filings", + "crosswalks", + "deserts", + "disability-hearings", + "eeoc-charges", + "fatal-crashes", + "fees", + "filing", + "idb-civil", + "immigration-courts", + "language", + "law-firm-economy", + "law-offices", + "lawyer-wages", + "legal-need", + "legal-prices", + "limitations", + "mdl", + "nursing-homes", + "opinions", + "platforms", + "referral", + "robocall-complaints", + "state-courts", + "truck-crashes", + "va-compensation", + "vehicle-complaints", + "veterans-representation", + "wage-enforcement", + "work-injuries" +]
- Changed
data_lookup1 field changed- changed
Input schema / properties / dataset / enumPrevious value: -[ - "bankruptcy", - "bar-pipeline", - "benchmarks", - "ca-courts", - "civil-filings", - "consumer-complaints", - "consumer-sentinel", - "crosswalks", - "deserts", - "disability-hearings", - "eeoc-charges", - "fatal-crashes", - "fees", - "filing", - "idb-civil", - "immigration-courts", - "language", - "law-firm-economy", - "law-offices", - "lawyer-wages", - "legal-need", - "legal-prices", - "limitations", - "mdl", - "nursing-homes", - "opinions", - "platforms", - "referral", - "robocall-complaints", - "state-courts", - "truck-crashes", - "veterans-representation", - "work-injuries" -]New value: +[ + "bankruptcy", + "bar-pipeline", + "benchmarks", + "ca-courts", + "civil-filings", + "consumer-complaints", + "consumer-sentinel", + "criminal-filings", + "crosswalks", + "deserts", + "disability-hearings", + "eeoc-charges", + "fatal-crashes", + "fees", + "filing", + "idb-civil", + "immigration-courts", + "language", + "law-firm-economy", + "law-offices", + "lawyer-wages", + "legal-need", + "legal-prices", + "limitations", + "mdl", + "nursing-homes", + "opinions", + "platforms", + "referral", + "robocall-complaints", + "state-courts", + "truck-crashes", + "va-compensation", + "vehicle-complaints", + "veterans-representation", + "wage-enforcement", + "work-injuries" +]
- Changed
data_search1 field changed- changed
Input schema / properties / datasets / items / enumPrevious value: -[ - "bankruptcy", - "bar-pipeline", - "benchmarks", - "ca-courts", - "civil-filings", - "consumer-complaints", - "consumer-sentinel", - "crosswalks", - "deserts", - "disability-hearings", - "eeoc-charges", - "fatal-crashes", - "fees", - "filing", - "idb-civil", - "immigration-courts", - "language", - "law-firm-economy", - "law-offices", - "lawyer-wages", - "legal-need", - "legal-prices", - "limitations", - "mdl", - "nursing-homes", - "opinions", - "platforms", - "referral", - "robocall-complaints", - "state-courts", - "truck-crashes", - "veterans-representation", - "work-injuries" -]New value: +[ + "bankruptcy", + "bar-pipeline", + "benchmarks", + "ca-courts", + "civil-filings", + "consumer-complaints", + "consumer-sentinel", + "criminal-filings", + "crosswalks", + "deserts", + "disability-hearings", + "eeoc-charges", + "fatal-crashes", + "fees", + "filing", + "idb-civil", + "immigration-courts", + "language", + "law-firm-economy", + "law-offices", + "lawyer-wages", + "legal-need", + "legal-prices", + "limitations", + "mdl", + "nursing-homes", + "opinions", + "platforms", + "referral", + "robocall-complaints", + "state-courts", + "truck-crashes", + "va-compensation", + "vehicle-complaints", + "veterans-representation", + "wage-enforcement", + "work-injuries" +]
- Changed
whats_new1 field changed- changed
Input schema / properties / datasets / items / enumPrevious value: -[ - "rules", - "bankruptcy", - "bar-pipeline", - "benchmarks", - "ca-courts", - "civil-filings", - "consumer-complaints", - "consumer-sentinel", - "crosswalks", - "deserts", - "disability-hearings", - "eeoc-charges", - "fatal-crashes", - "fees", - "filing", - "idb-civil", - "immigration-courts", - "language", - "law-firm-economy", - "law-offices", - "lawyer-wages", - "legal-need", - "legal-prices", - "limitations", - "mdl", - "nursing-homes", - "opinions", - "platforms", - "referral", - "robocall-complaints", - "state-courts", - "truck-crashes", - "veterans-representation", - "work-injuries" -]New value: +[ + "rules", + "bankruptcy", + "bar-pipeline", + "benchmarks", + "ca-courts", + "civil-filings", + "consumer-complaints", + "consumer-sentinel", + "criminal-filings", + "crosswalks", + "deserts", + "disability-hearings", + "eeoc-charges", + "fatal-crashes", + "fees", + "filing", + "idb-civil", + "immigration-courts", + "language", + "law-firm-economy", + "law-offices", + "lawyer-wages", + "legal-need", + "legal-prices", + "limitations", + "mdl", + "nursing-homes", + "opinions", + "platforms", + "referral", + "robocall-complaints", + "state-courts", + "truck-crashes", + "va-compensation", + "vehicle-complaints", + "veterans-representation", + "wage-enforcement", + "work-injuries" +]
24 tool updates
- Changed
calculate_fee_cap6 fields changed- changed
Input schema / properties / award_usd / descriptionPrevious value: -"The award, settlement or past-due benefits in US dollars (the base the rule names)"New value: +"The award, settlement or past-due benefits in US dollars (the…" - removed
Input schema / properties / detail / descriptionRemoved value: -"summary (default): each record as its id, a 1-2 sentence text, status, date checked, one source URL and the page to cite. full: every field, every source and the per-record provenance." - changed
Input schema / properties / jurisdiction / descriptionPrevious value: -"Two-letter state code, DC, or US for federal programs (Social Security, FTCA, VA)"New value: +"Two-letter state code, DC, or US for federal programs (Social…" - removed
Input schema / properties / program / descriptionRemoved value: -"workers-comp, med-mal, contingency-general, ssdi-ssi, ftca, va, longshore or other" - changed
Input schema / properties / stage / descriptionPrevious value: -"Optional: the stage, e.g. \"administrative\" or \"litigation\" (FTCA), \"agency\" or \"court\" (Social Security), \"before answer\" (Florida)"New value: +"Optional: the stage, e.g. \"administrative\" or \"litigation\"…" - removed
Output schema / propertiesRemoved value: -{ - "meta": { - "description": "Credit line (attribution), citation, DOI, version, license (CC BY 4.0), disclaimer, notice and the page to cite", - "required": [ - "attribution", - "license", - "disclaimer", - "notice" - ], - "type": "object" - }, - "nextCursor": { - "description": "Pass as `cursor` to get the next page; null on the last page", - "type": [ - "string", - "null" - ] - }, - "provenance": { - "description": "Where this came from: the publisher of the dataset, the dataset and its version DOI, the record id, the original source (who published it and its URL), the day that source was last checked, and when this answer was retrieved", - "properties": { - "citeUrl": { - "description": "The page to cite", - "type": [ - "string", - "null" - ] - }, - "dataset": { - "description": "Dataset id", - "type": "string" - }, - "datasetTitle": { - "type": "string" - }, - "dateChecked": { - "description": "YYYY-MM-DD the record was last checked against its source", - "type": [ - "string", - "null" - ] - }, - "doi": { - "description": "Version DOI", - "type": [ - "string", - "null" - ] - }, - "doiUrl": { - "type": [ - "string", - "null" - ] - }, - "line": { - "description": "The same facts as one sentence, to quote under an answer", - "type": "string" - }, - "publisher": { - "description": "Publisher of the dataset", - "type": "string" - }, - "recordId": { - "description": "Stable id of the record", - "type": [ - "string", - "null" - ] - }, - "retrievedAt": { - "description": "ISO 8601 time this answer was served", - "type": "string" - }, - "source": { - "description": "The original source: statute, rule, bar opinion, court report, agency table or platform policy", - "type": [ - "string", - "null" - ] - }, - "sourceKind": { - "description": "primary or secondary", - "type": [ - "string", - "null" - ] - }, - "sourceUrl": { - "type": [ - "string", - "null" - ] - }, - "status": { - "description": "P primary source, S secondary, D default (no specific rule found), U open question", - "type": [ - "string", - "null" - ] - }, - "version": { - "description": "Dataset version", - "type": "string" - } - }, - "required": [ - "publisher", - "dataset", - "version", - "retrievedAt" - ], - "type": "object" - } -}
- Changed
check_ad_elements3 fields changed- changed
Input schema / properties / ad_text / descriptionPrevious value: -"Optional ad copy, script or landing-page text, scanned for elements. Never stored."New value: +"Optional ad copy, script or landing-page text, scanned for…" - removed
Input schema / properties / detail / descriptionRemoved value: -"summary (default): each record as its id, a 1-2 sentence text, status, date checked, one source URL and the page to cite. full: every field, every source and the per-record provenance." - removed
Output schema / propertiesRemoved value: -{ - "meta": { - "description": "Credit line (attribution), citation, DOI, version, license (CC BY 4.0), disclaimer, notice and the page to cite", - "required": [ - "attribution", - "license", - "disclaimer", - "notice" - ], - "type": "object" - }, - "nextCursor": { - "description": "Pass as `cursor` to get the next page; null on the last page", - "type": [ - "string", - "null" - ] - }, - "provenance": { - "description": "Where this came from: the publisher of the dataset, the dataset and its version DOI, the record id, the original source (who published it and its URL), the day that source was last checked, and when this answer was retrieved", - "properties": { - "citeUrl": { - "description": "The page to cite", - "type": [ - "string", - "null" - ] - }, - "dataset": { - "description": "Dataset id", - "type": "string" - }, - "datasetTitle": { - "type": "string" - }, - "dateChecked": { - "description": "YYYY-MM-DD the record was last checked against its source", - "type": [ - "string", - "null" - ] - }, - "doi": { - "description": "Version DOI", - "type": [ - "string", - "null" - ] - }, - "doiUrl": { - "type": [ - "string", - "null" - ] - }, - "line": { - "description": "The same facts as one sentence, to quote under an answer", - "type": "string" - }, - "publisher": { - "description": "Publisher of the dataset", - "type": "string" - }, - "recordId": { - "description": "Stable id of the record", - "type": [ - "string", - "null" - ] - }, - "retrievedAt": { - "description": "ISO 8601 time this answer was served", - "type": "string" - }, - "source": { - "description": "The original source: statute, rule, bar opinion, court report, agency table or platform policy", - "type": [ - "string", - "null" - ] - }, - "sourceKind": { - "description": "primary or secondary", - "type": [ - "string", - "null" - ] - }, - "sourceUrl": { - "type": [ - "string", - "null" - ] - }, - "status": { - "description": "P primary source, S secondary, D default (no specific rule found), U open question", - "type": [ - "string", - "null" - ] - }, - "version": { - "description": "Dataset version", - "type": "string" - } - }, - "required": [ - "publisher", - "dataset", - "version", - "retrievedAt" - ], - "type": "object" - } -}
- Changed
cite4 fields changed- removed
Input schema / properties / dataset / descriptionRemoved value: -"Dataset id (list_datasets shows them)" - changed
Input schema / properties / dataset / enumPrevious value: -[ - "rules", - "bankruptcy", - "bar-pipeline", - "benchmarks", - "ca-courts", - "civil-filings", - "consumer-complaints", - "consumer-sentinel", - "crosswalks", - "deserts", - "disability-hearings", - "eeoc-charges", - "fatal-crashes", - "fees", - "filing", - "idb-civil", - "immigration-courts", - "language", - "law-firm-economy", - "law-offices", - "lawyer-wages", - "legal-need", - "legal-prices", - "limitations", - "mdl", - "nursing-homes", - "opinions", - "platforms", - "referral", - "robocall-complaints", - "state-courts", - "veterans-representation", - "work-injuries" -]New value: +[ + "rules", + "bankruptcy", + "bar-pipeline", + "benchmarks", + "ca-courts", + "civil-filings", + "consumer-complaints", + "consumer-sentinel", + "crosswalks", + "deserts", + "disability-hearings", + "eeoc-charges", + "fatal-crashes", + "fees", + "filing", + "idb-civil", + "immigration-courts", + "language", + "law-firm-economy", + "law-offices", + "lawyer-wages", + "legal-need", + "legal-prices", + "limitations", + "mdl", + "nursing-homes", + "opinions", + "platforms", + "referral", + "robocall-complaints", + "state-courts", + "truck-crashes", + "veterans-representation", + "work-injuries" +] - removed
Input schema / properties / detail / descriptionRemoved value: -"summary (default): each record as its id, a 1-2 sentence text, status, date checked, one source URL and the page to cite. full: every field, every source and the per-record provenance." - removed
Output schema / propertiesRemoved value: -{ - "meta": { - "description": "Credit line (attribution), citation, DOI, version, license (CC BY 4.0), disclaimer, notice and the page to cite", - "required": [ - "attribution", - "license", - "disclaimer", - "notice" - ], - "type": "object" - }, - "nextCursor": { - "description": "Pass as `cursor` to get the next page; null on the last page", - "type": [ - "string", - "null" - ] - }, - "provenance": { - "description": "Where this came from: the publisher of the dataset, the dataset and its version DOI, the record id, the original source (who published it and its URL), the day that source was last checked, and when this answer was retrieved", - "properties": { - "citeUrl": { - "description": "The page to cite", - "type": [ - "string", - "null" - ] - }, - "dataset": { - "description": "Dataset id", - "type": "string" - }, - "datasetTitle": { - "type": "string" - }, - "dateChecked": { - "description": "YYYY-MM-DD the record was last checked against its source", - "type": [ - "string", - "null" - ] - }, - "doi": { - "description": "Version DOI", - "type": [ - "string", - "null" - ] - }, - "doiUrl": { - "type": [ - "string", - "null" - ] - }, - "line": { - "description": "The same facts as one sentence, to quote under an answer", - "type": "string" - }, - "publisher": { - "description": "Publisher of the dataset", - "type": "string" - }, - "recordId": { - "description": "Stable id of the record", - "type": [ - "string", - "null" - ] - }, - "retrievedAt": { - "description": "ISO 8601 time this answer was served", - "type": "string" - }, - "source": { - "description": "The original source: statute, rule, bar opinion, court report, agency table or platform policy", - "type": [ - "string", - "null" - ] - }, - "sourceKind": { - "description": "primary or secondary", - "type": [ - "string", - "null" - ] - }, - "sourceUrl": { - "type": [ - "string", - "null" - ] - }, - "status": { - "description": "P primary source, S secondary, D default (no specific rule found), U open question", - "type": [ - "string", - "null" - ] - }, - "version": { - "description": "Dataset version", - "type": "string" - } - }, - "required": [ - "publisher", - "dataset", - "version", - "retrievedAt" - ], - "type": "object" - } -}
- Changed
compare_states4 fields changed- removed
Input schema / properties / detail / descriptionRemoved value: -"summary (default): each record as its id, a 1-2 sentence text, status, date checked, one source URL and the page to cite. full: every field, every source and the per-record provenance." - removed
Input schema / properties / states / items / descriptionRemoved value: -"Two-letter code (TX), or DC. Full names (Texas) also work." - removed
Input schema / properties / topic / descriptionRemoved value: -"filing: Ad filing or review; requiredContent: What each ad must include; waitingPeriod: Waiting period for targeted injury contact; claims: Results, testimonials and “specialist” claims; referral: Referral services and lead generators; language: Ads in Spanish and other languages; recording: Call-recording consent; texting: Texting and telemarketing law; privacy: Privacy and health-data law" - removed
Output schema / propertiesRemoved value: -{ - "meta": { - "description": "Credit line (attribution), citation, DOI, version, license (CC BY 4.0), disclaimer, notice and the page to cite", - "required": [ - "attribution", - "license", - "disclaimer", - "notice" - ], - "type": "object" - }, - "nextCursor": { - "description": "Pass as `cursor` to get the next page; null on the last page", - "type": [ - "string", - "null" - ] - }, - "provenance": { - "description": "Where this came from: the publisher of the dataset, the dataset and its version DOI, the record id, the original source (who published it and its URL), the day that source was last checked, and when this answer was retrieved", - "properties": { - "citeUrl": { - "description": "The page to cite", - "type": [ - "string", - "null" - ] - }, - "dataset": { - "description": "Dataset id", - "type": "string" - }, - "datasetTitle": { - "type": "string" - }, - "dateChecked": { - "description": "YYYY-MM-DD the record was last checked against its source", - "type": [ - "string", - "null" - ] - }, - "doi": { - "description": "Version DOI", - "type": [ - "string", - "null" - ] - }, - "doiUrl": { - "type": [ - "string", - "null" - ] - }, - "line": { - "description": "The same facts as one sentence, to quote under an answer", - "type": "string" - }, - "publisher": { - "description": "Publisher of the dataset", - "type": "string" - }, - "recordId": { - "description": "Stable id of the record", - "type": [ - "string", - "null" - ] - }, - "retrievedAt": { - "description": "ISO 8601 time this answer was served", - "type": "string" - }, - "source": { - "description": "The original source: statute, rule, bar opinion, court report, agency table or platform policy", - "type": [ - "string", - "null" - ] - }, - "sourceKind": { - "description": "primary or secondary", - "type": [ - "string", - "null" - ] - }, - "sourceUrl": { - "type": [ - "string", - "null" - ] - }, - "status": { - "description": "P primary source, S secondary, D default (no specific rule found), U open question", - "type": [ - "string", - "null" - ] - }, - "version": { - "description": "Dataset version", - "type": "string" - } - }, - "required": [ - "publisher", - "dataset", - "version", - "retrievedAt" - ], - "type": "object" - } -}
- Changed
data_compare4 fields changed- removed
Input schema / properties / dataset / descriptionRemoved value: -"Dataset id (list_datasets describes each one)" - changed
Input schema / properties / dataset / enumPrevious value: -[ - "bankruptcy", - "bar-pipeline", - "benchmarks", - "ca-courts", - "civil-filings", - "consumer-complaints", - "consumer-sentinel", - "crosswalks", - "deserts", - "disability-hearings", - "eeoc-charges", - "fatal-crashes", - "fees", - "filing", - "idb-civil", - "immigration-courts", - "language", - "law-firm-economy", - "law-offices", - "lawyer-wages", - "legal-need", - "legal-prices", - "limitations", - "mdl", - "nursing-homes", - "opinions", - "platforms", - "referral", - "robocall-complaints", - "state-courts", - "veterans-representation", - "work-injuries" -]New value: +[ + "bankruptcy", + "bar-pipeline", + "benchmarks", + "ca-courts", + "civil-filings", + "consumer-complaints", + "consumer-sentinel", + "crosswalks", + "deserts", + "disability-hearings", + "eeoc-charges", + "fatal-crashes", + "fees", + "filing", + "idb-civil", + "immigration-courts", + "language", + "law-firm-economy", + "law-offices", + "lawyer-wages", + "legal-need", + "legal-prices", + "limitations", + "mdl", + "nursing-homes", + "opinions", + "platforms", + "referral", + "robocall-complaints", + "state-courts", + "truck-crashes", + "veterans-representation", + "work-injuries" +] - removed
Input schema / properties / detail / descriptionRemoved value: -"summary (default): each record as its id, a 1-2 sentence text, status, date checked, one source URL and the page to cite. full: every field, every source and the per-record provenance." - removed
Output schema / propertiesRemoved value: -{ - "meta": { - "description": "Credit line (attribution), citation, DOI, version, license (CC BY 4.0), disclaimer, notice and the page to cite", - "required": [ - "attribution", - "license", - "disclaimer", - "notice" - ], - "type": "object" - }, - "nextCursor": { - "description": "Pass as `cursor` to get the next page; null on the last page", - "type": [ - "string", - "null" - ] - }, - "provenance": { - "description": "Where this came from: the publisher of the dataset, the dataset and its version DOI, the record id, the original source (who published it and its URL), the day that source was last checked, and when this answer was retrieved", - "properties": { - "citeUrl": { - "description": "The page to cite", - "type": [ - "string", - "null" - ] - }, - "dataset": { - "description": "Dataset id", - "type": "string" - }, - "datasetTitle": { - "type": "string" - }, - "dateChecked": { - "description": "YYYY-MM-DD the record was last checked against its source", - "type": [ - "string", - "null" - ] - }, - "doi": { - "description": "Version DOI", - "type": [ - "string", - "null" - ] - }, - "doiUrl": { - "type": [ - "string", - "null" - ] - }, - "line": { - "description": "The same facts as one sentence, to quote under an answer", - "type": "string" - }, - "publisher": { - "description": "Publisher of the dataset", - "type": "string" - }, - "recordId": { - "description": "Stable id of the record", - "type": [ - "string", - "null" - ] - }, - "retrievedAt": { - "description": "ISO 8601 time this answer was served", - "type": "string" - }, - "source": { - "description": "The original source: statute, rule, bar opinion, court report, agency table or platform policy", - "type": [ - "string", - "null" - ] - }, - "sourceKind": { - "description": "primary or secondary", - "type": [ - "string", - "null" - ] - }, - "sourceUrl": { - "type": [ - "string", - "null" - ] - }, - "status": { - "description": "P primary source, S secondary, D default (no specific rule found), U open question", - "type": [ - "string", - "null" - ] - }, - "version": { - "description": "Dataset version", - "type": "string" - } - }, - "required": [ - "publisher", - "dataset", - "version", - "retrievedAt" - ], - "type": "object" - } -}
- Changed
data_lookup4 fields changed- removed
Input schema / properties / dataset / descriptionRemoved value: -"Dataset id (list_datasets describes each one)" - changed
Input schema / properties / dataset / enumPrevious value: -[ - "bankruptcy", - "bar-pipeline", - "benchmarks", - "ca-courts", - "civil-filings", - "consumer-complaints", - "consumer-sentinel", - "crosswalks", - "deserts", - "disability-hearings", - "eeoc-charges", - "fatal-crashes", - "fees", - "filing", - "idb-civil", - "immigration-courts", - "language", - "law-firm-economy", - "law-offices", - "lawyer-wages", - "legal-need", - "legal-prices", - "limitations", - "mdl", - "nursing-homes", - "opinions", - "platforms", - "referral", - "robocall-complaints", - "state-courts", - "veterans-representation", - "work-injuries" -]New value: +[ + "bankruptcy", + "bar-pipeline", + "benchmarks", + "ca-courts", + "civil-filings", + "consumer-complaints", + "consumer-sentinel", + "crosswalks", + "deserts", + "disability-hearings", + "eeoc-charges", + "fatal-crashes", + "fees", + "filing", + "idb-civil", + "immigration-courts", + "language", + "law-firm-economy", + "law-offices", + "lawyer-wages", + "legal-need", + "legal-prices", + "limitations", + "mdl", + "nursing-homes", + "opinions", + "platforms", + "referral", + "robocall-complaints", + "state-courts", + "truck-crashes", + "veterans-representation", + "work-injuries" +] - removed
Input schema / properties / detail / descriptionRemoved value: -"summary (default): each record as its id, a 1-2 sentence text, status, date checked, one source URL and the page to cite. full: every field, every source and the per-record provenance." - removed
Output schema / propertiesRemoved value: -{ - "meta": { - "description": "Credit line (attribution), citation, DOI, version, license (CC BY 4.0), disclaimer, notice and the page to cite", - "required": [ - "attribution", - "license", - "disclaimer", - "notice" - ], - "type": "object" - }, - "nextCursor": { - "description": "Pass as `cursor` to get the next page; null on the last page", - "type": [ - "string", - "null" - ] - }, - "provenance": { - "description": "Where this came from: the publisher of the dataset, the dataset and its version DOI, the record id, the original source (who published it and its URL), the day that source was last checked, and when this answer was retrieved", - "properties": { - "citeUrl": { - "description": "The page to cite", - "type": [ - "string", - "null" - ] - }, - "dataset": { - "description": "Dataset id", - "type": "string" - }, - "datasetTitle": { - "type": "string" - }, - "dateChecked": { - "description": "YYYY-MM-DD the record was last checked against its source", - "type": [ - "string", - "null" - ] - }, - "doi": { - "description": "Version DOI", - "type": [ - "string", - "null" - ] - }, - "doiUrl": { - "type": [ - "string", - "null" - ] - }, - "line": { - "description": "The same facts as one sentence, to quote under an answer", - "type": "string" - }, - "publisher": { - "description": "Publisher of the dataset", - "type": "string" - }, - "recordId": { - "description": "Stable id of the record", - "type": [ - "string", - "null" - ] - }, - "retrievedAt": { - "description": "ISO 8601 time this answer was served", - "type": "string" - }, - "source": { - "description": "The original source: statute, rule, bar opinion, court report, agency table or platform policy", - "type": [ - "string", - "null" - ] - }, - "sourceKind": { - "description": "primary or secondary", - "type": [ - "string", - "null" - ] - }, - "sourceUrl": { - "type": [ - "string", - "null" - ] - }, - "status": { - "description": "P primary source, S secondary, D default (no specific rule found), U open question", - "type": [ - "string", - "null" - ] - }, - "version": { - "description": "Dataset version", - "type": "string" - } - }, - "required": [ - "publisher", - "dataset", - "version", - "retrievedAt" - ], - "type": "object" - } -}
- Changed
data_search3 fields changed- changed
Input schema / properties / datasets / items / enumPrevious value: -[ - "bankruptcy", - "bar-pipeline", - "benchmarks", - "ca-courts", - "civil-filings", - "consumer-complaints", - "consumer-sentinel", - "crosswalks", - "deserts", - "disability-hearings", - "eeoc-charges", - "fatal-crashes", - "fees", - "filing", - "idb-civil", - "immigration-courts", - "language", - "law-firm-economy", - "law-offices", - "lawyer-wages", - "legal-need", - "legal-prices", - "limitations", - "mdl", - "nursing-homes", - "opinions", - "platforms", - "referral", - "robocall-complaints", - "state-courts", - "veterans-representation", - "work-injuries" -]New value: +[ + "bankruptcy", + "bar-pipeline", + "benchmarks", + "ca-courts", + "civil-filings", + "consumer-complaints", + "consumer-sentinel", + "crosswalks", + "deserts", + "disability-hearings", + "eeoc-charges", + "fatal-crashes", + "fees", + "filing", + "idb-civil", + "immigration-courts", + "language", + "law-firm-economy", + "law-offices", + "lawyer-wages", + "legal-need", + "legal-prices", + "limitations", + "mdl", + "nursing-homes", + "opinions", + "platforms", + "referral", + "robocall-complaints", + "state-courts", + "truck-crashes", + "veterans-representation", + "work-injuries" +] - removed
Input schema / properties / detail / descriptionRemoved value: -"summary (default): each record as its id, a 1-2 sentence text, status, date checked, one source URL and the page to cite. full: every field, every source and the per-record provenance." - removed
Output schema / propertiesRemoved value: -{ - "meta": { - "description": "Credit line (attribution), citation, DOI, version, license (CC BY 4.0), disclaimer, notice and the page to cite", - "required": [ - "attribution", - "license", - "disclaimer", - "notice" - ], - "type": "object" - }, - "nextCursor": { - "description": "Pass as `cursor` to get the next page; null on the last page", - "type": [ - "string", - "null" - ] - }, - "provenance": { - "description": "Where this came from: the publisher of the dataset, the dataset and its version DOI, the record id, the original source (who published it and its URL), the day that source was last checked, and when this answer was retrieved", - "properties": { - "citeUrl": { - "description": "The page to cite", - "type": [ - "string", - "null" - ] - }, - "dataset": { - "description": "Dataset id", - "type": "string" - }, - "datasetTitle": { - "type": "string" - }, - "dateChecked": { - "description": "YYYY-MM-DD the record was last checked against its source", - "type": [ - "string", - "null" - ] - }, - "doi": { - "description": "Version DOI", - "type": [ - "string", - "null" - ] - }, - "doiUrl": { - "type": [ - "string", - "null" - ] - }, - "line": { - "description": "The same facts as one sentence, to quote under an answer", - "type": "string" - }, - "publisher": { - "description": "Publisher of the dataset", - "type": "string" - }, - "recordId": { - "description": "Stable id of the record", - "type": [ - "string", - "null" - ] - }, - "retrievedAt": { - "description": "ISO 8601 time this answer was served", - "type": "string" - }, - "source": { - "description": "The original source: statute, rule, bar opinion, court report, agency table or platform policy", - "type": [ - "string", - "null" - ] - }, - "sourceKind": { - "description": "primary or secondary", - "type": [ - "string", - "null" - ] - }, - "sourceUrl": { - "type": [ - "string", - "null" - ] - }, - "status": { - "description": "P primary source, S secondary, D default (no specific rule found), U open question", - "type": [ - "string", - "null" - ] - }, - "version": { - "description": "Dataset version", - "type": "string" - } - }, - "required": [ - "publisher", - "dataset", - "version", - "retrievedAt" - ], - "type": "object" - } -}
- Changed
fetch1 field changed- removed
Output schema / propertiesRemoved value: -{ - "id": { - "type": "string" - }, - "metadata": { - "type": "object" - }, - "text": { - "type": "string" - }, - "title": { - "type": "string" - }, - "url": { - "type": "string" - } -}
- Changed
get_ad_filing_requirements2 fields changed- removed
Input schema / properties / detail / descriptionRemoved value: -"summary (default): each record as its id, a 1-2 sentence text, status, date checked, one source URL and the page to cite. full: every field, every source and the per-record provenance." - removed
Output schema / propertiesRemoved value: -{ - "meta": { - "description": "Credit line (attribution), citation, DOI, version, license (CC BY 4.0), disclaimer, notice and the page to cite", - "required": [ - "attribution", - "license", - "disclaimer", - "notice" - ], - "type": "object" - }, - "nextCursor": { - "description": "Pass as `cursor` to get the next page; null on the last page", - "type": [ - "string", - "null" - ] - }, - "provenance": { - "description": "Where this came from: the publisher of the dataset, the dataset and its version DOI, the record id, the original source (who published it and its URL), the day that source was last checked, and when this answer was retrieved", - "properties": { - "citeUrl": { - "description": "The page to cite", - "type": [ - "string", - "null" - ] - }, - "dataset": { - "description": "Dataset id", - "type": "string" - }, - "datasetTitle": { - "type": "string" - }, - "dateChecked": { - "description": "YYYY-MM-DD the record was last checked against its source", - "type": [ - "string", - "null" - ] - }, - "doi": { - "description": "Version DOI", - "type": [ - "string", - "null" - ] - }, - "doiUrl": { - "type": [ - "string", - "null" - ] - }, - "line": { - "description": "The same facts as one sentence, to quote under an answer", - "type": "string" - }, - "publisher": { - "description": "Publisher of the dataset", - "type": "string" - }, - "recordId": { - "description": "Stable id of the record", - "type": [ - "string", - "null" - ] - }, - "retrievedAt": { - "description": "ISO 8601 time this answer was served", - "type": "string" - }, - "source": { - "description": "The original source: statute, rule, bar opinion, court report, agency table or platform policy", - "type": [ - "string", - "null" - ] - }, - "sourceKind": { - "description": "primary or secondary", - "type": [ - "string", - "null" - ] - }, - "sourceUrl": { - "type": [ - "string", - "null" - ] - }, - "status": { - "description": "P primary source, S secondary, D default (no specific rule found), U open question", - "type": [ - "string", - "null" - ] - }, - "version": { - "description": "Dataset version", - "type": "string" - } - }, - "required": [ - "publisher", - "dataset", - "version", - "retrievedAt" - ], - "type": "object" - } -}
- Changed
get_ad_platform_policies5 fields changed- removed
Input schema / properties / area / descriptionRemoved value: -"Optional: one policy area" - changed
Input schema / properties / cursor / descriptionPrevious value: -"The nextCursor from the previous page; leave out for the first page"New value: +"The nextCursor from the previous page; leave out for the first…" - removed
Input schema / properties / detail / descriptionRemoved value: -"summary (default): each record as its id, a 1-2 sentence text, status, date checked, one source URL and the page to cite. full: every field, every source and the per-record provenance." - removed
Input schema / properties / platform / descriptionRemoved value: -"Optional: one platform key" - removed
Output schema / propertiesRemoved value: -{ - "meta": { - "description": "Credit line (attribution), citation, DOI, version, license (CC BY 4.0), disclaimer, notice and the page to cite", - "required": [ - "attribution", - "license", - "disclaimer", - "notice" - ], - "type": "object" - }, - "nextCursor": { - "description": "Pass as `cursor` to get the next page; null on the last page", - "type": [ - "string", - "null" - ] - }, - "provenance": { - "description": "Where this came from: the publisher of the dataset, the dataset and its version DOI, the record id, the original source (who published it and its URL), the day that source was last checked, and when this answer was retrieved", - "properties": { - "citeUrl": { - "description": "The page to cite", - "type": [ - "string", - "null" - ] - }, - "dataset": { - "description": "Dataset id", - "type": "string" - }, - "datasetTitle": { - "type": "string" - }, - "dateChecked": { - "description": "YYYY-MM-DD the record was last checked against its source", - "type": [ - "string", - "null" - ] - }, - "doi": { - "description": "Version DOI", - "type": [ - "string", - "null" - ] - }, - "doiUrl": { - "type": [ - "string", - "null" - ] - }, - "line": { - "description": "The same facts as one sentence, to quote under an answer", - "type": "string" - }, - "publisher": { - "description": "Publisher of the dataset", - "type": "string" - }, - "recordId": { - "description": "Stable id of the record", - "type": [ - "string", - "null" - ] - }, - "retrievedAt": { - "description": "ISO 8601 time this answer was served", - "type": "string" - }, - "source": { - "description": "The original source: statute, rule, bar opinion, court report, agency table or platform policy", - "type": [ - "string", - "null" - ] - }, - "sourceKind": { - "description": "primary or secondary", - "type": [ - "string", - "null" - ] - }, - "sourceUrl": { - "type": [ - "string", - "null" - ] - }, - "status": { - "description": "P primary source, S secondary, D default (no specific rule found), U open question", - "type": [ - "string", - "null" - ] - }, - "version": { - "description": "Dataset version", - "type": "string" - } - }, - "required": [ - "publisher", - "dataset", - "version", - "retrievedAt" - ], - "type": "object" - } -}
- Changed
get_attorney_fee_caps4 fields changed- removed
Input schema / properties / detail / descriptionRemoved value: -"summary (default): each record as its id, a 1-2 sentence text, status, date checked, one source URL and the page to cite. full: every field, every source and the per-record provenance." - changed
Input schema / properties / jurisdiction / descriptionPrevious value: -"Two-letter state code, DC, or US for federal programs; full state names also work"New value: +"Two-letter state code, DC, or US for federal programs; full…" - removed
Input schema / properties / program / descriptionRemoved value: -"Optional: only this program" - removed
Output schema / propertiesRemoved value: -{ - "meta": { - "description": "Credit line (attribution), citation, DOI, version, license (CC BY 4.0), disclaimer, notice and the page to cite", - "required": [ - "attribution", - "license", - "disclaimer", - "notice" - ], - "type": "object" - }, - "nextCursor": { - "description": "Pass as `cursor` to get the next page; null on the last page", - "type": [ - "string", - "null" - ] - }, - "provenance": { - "description": "Where this came from: the publisher of the dataset, the dataset and its version DOI, the record id, the original source (who published it and its URL), the day that source was last checked, and when this answer was retrieved", - "properties": { - "citeUrl": { - "description": "The page to cite", - "type": [ - "string", - "null" - ] - }, - "dataset": { - "description": "Dataset id", - "type": "string" - }, - "datasetTitle": { - "type": "string" - }, - "dateChecked": { - "description": "YYYY-MM-DD the record was last checked against its source", - "type": [ - "string", - "null" - ] - }, - "doi": { - "description": "Version DOI", - "type": [ - "string", - "null" - ] - }, - "doiUrl": { - "type": [ - "string", - "null" - ] - }, - "line": { - "description": "The same facts as one sentence, to quote under an answer", - "type": "string" - }, - "publisher": { - "description": "Publisher of the dataset", - "type": "string" - }, - "recordId": { - "description": "Stable id of the record", - "type": [ - "string", - "null" - ] - }, - "retrievedAt": { - "description": "ISO 8601 time this answer was served", - "type": "string" - }, - "source": { - "description": "The original source: statute, rule, bar opinion, court report, agency table or platform policy", - "type": [ - "string", - "null" - ] - }, - "sourceKind": { - "description": "primary or secondary", - "type": [ - "string", - "null" - ] - }, - "sourceUrl": { - "type": [ - "string", - "null" - ] - }, - "status": { - "description": "P primary source, S secondary, D default (no specific rule found), U open question", - "type": [ - "string", - "null" - ] - }, - "version": { - "description": "Dataset version", - "type": "string" - } - }, - "required": [ - "publisher", - "dataset", - "version", - "retrievedAt" - ], - "type": "object" - } -}
- Changed
get_benchmark4 fields changed- removed
Input schema / properties / detail / descriptionRemoved value: -"summary (default): each record as its id, a 1-2 sentence text, status, date checked, one source URL and the page to cite. full: every field, every source and the per-record provenance." - changed
Input schema / properties / query / descriptionPrevious value: -"Optional words to keep only matching rows, e.g. \"hour\" or \"Local Services\""New value: +"Optional words to keep only matching rows, e.g. \"hour\" or…" - removed
Input schema / properties / table / descriptionRemoved value: -"The table id (the benchmarks dataset key). Leave out to list the tables." - removed
Output schema / propertiesRemoved value: -{ - "meta": { - "description": "Credit line (attribution), citation, DOI, version, license (CC BY 4.0), disclaimer, notice and the page to cite", - "required": [ - "attribution", - "license", - "disclaimer", - "notice" - ], - "type": "object" - }, - "nextCursor": { - "description": "Pass as `cursor` to get the next page; null on the last page", - "type": [ - "string", - "null" - ] - }, - "provenance": { - "description": "Where this came from: the publisher of the dataset, the dataset and its version DOI, the record id, the original source (who published it and its URL), the day that source was last checked, and when this answer was retrieved", - "properties": { - "citeUrl": { - "description": "The page to cite", - "type": [ - "string", - "null" - ] - }, - "dataset": { - "description": "Dataset id", - "type": "string" - }, - "datasetTitle": { - "type": "string" - }, - "dateChecked": { - "description": "YYYY-MM-DD the record was last checked against its source", - "type": [ - "string", - "null" - ] - }, - "doi": { - "description": "Version DOI", - "type": [ - "string", - "null" - ] - }, - "doiUrl": { - "type": [ - "string", - "null" - ] - }, - "line": { - "description": "The same facts as one sentence, to quote under an answer", - "type": "string" - }, - "publisher": { - "description": "Publisher of the dataset", - "type": "string" - }, - "recordId": { - "description": "Stable id of the record", - "type": [ - "string", - "null" - ] - }, - "retrievedAt": { - "description": "ISO 8601 time this answer was served", - "type": "string" - }, - "source": { - "description": "The original source: statute, rule, bar opinion, court report, agency table or platform policy", - "type": [ - "string", - "null" - ] - }, - "sourceKind": { - "description": "primary or secondary", - "type": [ - "string", - "null" - ] - }, - "sourceUrl": { - "type": [ - "string", - "null" - ] - }, - "status": { - "description": "P primary source, S secondary, D default (no specific rule found), U open question", - "type": [ - "string", - "null" - ] - }, - "version": { - "description": "Dataset version", - "type": "string" - } - }, - "required": [ - "publisher", - "dataset", - "version", - "retrievedAt" - ], - "type": "object" - } -}
- Changed
get_ca_court_filings4 fields changed- changed
Input schema / properties / county / descriptionPrevious value: -"County name (\"Los Angeles\", \"san-diego\") or CA for the statewide row"New value: +"County name (\"Los Angeles\", \"san-diego\") or CA for the…" - removed
Input schema / properties / detail / descriptionRemoved value: -"summary (default): each record as its id, a 1-2 sentence text, status, date checked, one source URL and the page to cite. full: every field, every source and the per-record provenance." - removed
Input schema / properties / group / descriptionRemoved value: -"Optional: one group of case types" - removed
Output schema / propertiesRemoved value: -{ - "meta": { - "description": "Credit line (attribution), citation, DOI, version, license (CC BY 4.0), disclaimer, notice and the page to cite", - "required": [ - "attribution", - "license", - "disclaimer", - "notice" - ], - "type": "object" - }, - "nextCursor": { - "description": "Pass as `cursor` to get the next page; null on the last page", - "type": [ - "string", - "null" - ] - }, - "provenance": { - "description": "Where this came from: the publisher of the dataset, the dataset and its version DOI, the record id, the original source (who published it and its URL), the day that source was last checked, and when this answer was retrieved", - "properties": { - "citeUrl": { - "description": "The page to cite", - "type": [ - "string", - "null" - ] - }, - "dataset": { - "description": "Dataset id", - "type": "string" - }, - "datasetTitle": { - "type": "string" - }, - "dateChecked": { - "description": "YYYY-MM-DD the record was last checked against its source", - "type": [ - "string", - "null" - ] - }, - "doi": { - "description": "Version DOI", - "type": [ - "string", - "null" - ] - }, - "doiUrl": { - "type": [ - "string", - "null" - ] - }, - "line": { - "description": "The same facts as one sentence, to quote under an answer", - "type": "string" - }, - "publisher": { - "description": "Publisher of the dataset", - "type": "string" - }, - "recordId": { - "description": "Stable id of the record", - "type": [ - "string", - "null" - ] - }, - "retrievedAt": { - "description": "ISO 8601 time this answer was served", - "type": "string" - }, - "source": { - "description": "The original source: statute, rule, bar opinion, court report, agency table or platform policy", - "type": [ - "string", - "null" - ] - }, - "sourceKind": { - "description": "primary or secondary", - "type": [ - "string", - "null" - ] - }, - "sourceUrl": { - "type": [ - "string", - "null" - ] - }, - "status": { - "description": "P primary source, S secondary, D default (no specific rule found), U open question", - "type": [ - "string", - "null" - ] - }, - "version": { - "description": "Dataset version", - "type": "string" - } - }, - "required": [ - "publisher", - "dataset", - "version", - "retrievedAt" - ], - "type": "object" - } -}
- Changed
get_rule3 fields changed- removed
Input schema / properties / detail / descriptionRemoved value: -"summary (default): each record as its id, a 1-2 sentence text, status, date checked, one source URL and the page to cite. full: every field, every source and the per-record provenance." - removed
Input schema / properties / topic / descriptionRemoved value: -"filing: Ad filing or review; requiredContent: What each ad must include; waitingPeriod: Waiting period for targeted injury contact; claims: Results, testimonials and “specialist” claims; referral: Referral services and lead generators; language: Ads in Spanish and other languages; recording: Call-recording consent; texting: Texting and telemarketing law; privacy: Privacy and health-data law" - removed
Output schema / propertiesRemoved value: -{ - "meta": { - "description": "Credit line (attribution), citation, DOI, version, license (CC BY 4.0), disclaimer, notice and the page to cite", - "required": [ - "attribution", - "license", - "disclaimer", - "notice" - ], - "type": "object" - }, - "nextCursor": { - "description": "Pass as `cursor` to get the next page; null on the last page", - "type": [ - "string", - "null" - ] - }, - "provenance": { - "description": "Where this came from: the publisher of the dataset, the dataset and its version DOI, the record id, the original source (who published it and its URL), the day that source was last checked, and when this answer was retrieved", - "properties": { - "citeUrl": { - "description": "The page to cite", - "type": [ - "string", - "null" - ] - }, - "dataset": { - "description": "Dataset id", - "type": "string" - }, - "datasetTitle": { - "type": "string" - }, - "dateChecked": { - "description": "YYYY-MM-DD the record was last checked against its source", - "type": [ - "string", - "null" - ] - }, - "doi": { - "description": "Version DOI", - "type": [ - "string", - "null" - ] - }, - "doiUrl": { - "type": [ - "string", - "null" - ] - }, - "line": { - "description": "The same facts as one sentence, to quote under an answer", - "type": "string" - }, - "publisher": { - "description": "Publisher of the dataset", - "type": "string" - }, - "recordId": { - "description": "Stable id of the record", - "type": [ - "string", - "null" - ] - }, - "retrievedAt": { - "description": "ISO 8601 time this answer was served", - "type": "string" - }, - "source": { - "description": "The original source: statute, rule, bar opinion, court report, agency table or platform policy", - "type": [ - "string", - "null" - ] - }, - "sourceKind": { - "description": "primary or secondary", - "type": [ - "string", - "null" - ] - }, - "sourceUrl": { - "type": [ - "string", - "null" - ] - }, - "status": { - "description": "P primary source, S secondary, D default (no specific rule found), U open question", - "type": [ - "string", - "null" - ] - }, - "version": { - "description": "Dataset version", - "type": "string" - } - }, - "required": [ - "publisher", - "dataset", - "version", - "retrievedAt" - ], - "type": "object" - } -}
- Changed
get_spanish_demand_supply3 fields changed- changed
Input schema / properties / area / descriptionPrevious value: -"A state code (TX), DC, US, a metro code (26420), or a metro name (\"Houston\")"New value: +"A state code (TX), DC, US, a metro code (26420), or a metro…" - removed
Input schema / properties / detail / descriptionRemoved value: -"summary (default): each record as its id, a 1-2 sentence text, status, date checked, one source URL and the page to cite. full: every field, every source and the per-record provenance." - removed
Output schema / propertiesRemoved value: -{ - "meta": { - "description": "Credit line (attribution), citation, DOI, version, license (CC BY 4.0), disclaimer, notice and the page to cite", - "required": [ - "attribution", - "license", - "disclaimer", - "notice" - ], - "type": "object" - }, - "nextCursor": { - "description": "Pass as `cursor` to get the next page; null on the last page", - "type": [ - "string", - "null" - ] - }, - "provenance": { - "description": "Where this came from: the publisher of the dataset, the dataset and its version DOI, the record id, the original source (who published it and its URL), the day that source was last checked, and when this answer was retrieved", - "properties": { - "citeUrl": { - "description": "The page to cite", - "type": [ - "string", - "null" - ] - }, - "dataset": { - "description": "Dataset id", - "type": "string" - }, - "datasetTitle": { - "type": "string" - }, - "dateChecked": { - "description": "YYYY-MM-DD the record was last checked against its source", - "type": [ - "string", - "null" - ] - }, - "doi": { - "description": "Version DOI", - "type": [ - "string", - "null" - ] - }, - "doiUrl": { - "type": [ - "string", - "null" - ] - }, - "line": { - "description": "The same facts as one sentence, to quote under an answer", - "type": "string" - }, - "publisher": { - "description": "Publisher of the dataset", - "type": "string" - }, - "recordId": { - "description": "Stable id of the record", - "type": [ - "string", - "null" - ] - }, - "retrievedAt": { - "description": "ISO 8601 time this answer was served", - "type": "string" - }, - "source": { - "description": "The original source: statute, rule, bar opinion, court report, agency table or platform policy", - "type": [ - "string", - "null" - ] - }, - "sourceKind": { - "description": "primary or secondary", - "type": [ - "string", - "null" - ] - }, - "sourceUrl": { - "type": [ - "string", - "null" - ] - }, - "status": { - "description": "P primary source, S secondary, D default (no specific rule found), U open question", - "type": [ - "string", - "null" - ] - }, - "version": { - "description": "Dataset version", - "type": "string" - } - }, - "required": [ - "publisher", - "dataset", - "version", - "retrievedAt" - ], - "type": "object" - } -}
- Changed
get_state_market_brief2 fields changed- removed
Input schema / properties / detail / descriptionRemoved value: -"summary (default): each record as its id, a 1-2 sentence text, status, date checked, one source URL and the page to cite. full: every field, every source and the per-record provenance." - removed
Output schema / propertiesRemoved value: -{ - "meta": { - "description": "Credit line (attribution), citation, DOI, version, license (CC BY 4.0), disclaimer, notice and the page to cite", - "required": [ - "attribution", - "license", - "disclaimer", - "notice" - ], - "type": "object" - }, - "nextCursor": { - "description": "Pass as `cursor` to get the next page; null on the last page", - "type": [ - "string", - "null" - ] - }, - "provenance": { - "description": "Where this came from: the publisher of the dataset, the dataset and its version DOI, the record id, the original source (who published it and its URL), the day that source was last checked, and when this answer was retrieved", - "properties": { - "citeUrl": { - "description": "The page to cite", - "type": [ - "string", - "null" - ] - }, - "dataset": { - "description": "Dataset id", - "type": "string" - }, - "datasetTitle": { - "type": "string" - }, - "dateChecked": { - "description": "YYYY-MM-DD the record was last checked against its source", - "type": [ - "string", - "null" - ] - }, - "doi": { - "description": "Version DOI", - "type": [ - "string", - "null" - ] - }, - "doiUrl": { - "type": [ - "string", - "null" - ] - }, - "line": { - "description": "The same facts as one sentence, to quote under an answer", - "type": "string" - }, - "publisher": { - "description": "Publisher of the dataset", - "type": "string" - }, - "recordId": { - "description": "Stable id of the record", - "type": [ - "string", - "null" - ] - }, - "retrievedAt": { - "description": "ISO 8601 time this answer was served", - "type": "string" - }, - "source": { - "description": "The original source: statute, rule, bar opinion, court report, agency table or platform policy", - "type": [ - "string", - "null" - ] - }, - "sourceKind": { - "description": "primary or secondary", - "type": [ - "string", - "null" - ] - }, - "sourceUrl": { - "type": [ - "string", - "null" - ] - }, - "status": { - "description": "P primary source, S secondary, D default (no specific rule found), U open question", - "type": [ - "string", - "null" - ] - }, - "version": { - "description": "Dataset version", - "type": "string" - } - }, - "required": [ - "publisher", - "dataset", - "version", - "retrievedAt" - ], - "type": "object" - } -}
- Changed
get_state_rules2 fields changed- removed
Input schema / properties / detail / descriptionRemoved value: -"summary (default): each record as its id, a 1-2 sentence text, status, date checked, one source URL and the page to cite. full: every field, every source and the per-record provenance." - removed
Output schema / propertiesRemoved value: -{ - "meta": { - "description": "Credit line (attribution), citation, DOI, version, license (CC BY 4.0), disclaimer, notice and the page to cite", - "required": [ - "attribution", - "license", - "disclaimer", - "notice" - ], - "type": "object" - }, - "nextCursor": { - "description": "Pass as `cursor` to get the next page; null on the last page", - "type": [ - "string", - "null" - ] - }, - "provenance": { - "description": "Where this came from: the publisher of the dataset, the dataset and its version DOI, the record id, the original source (who published it and its URL), the day that source was last checked, and when this answer was retrieved", - "properties": { - "citeUrl": { - "description": "The page to cite", - "type": [ - "string", - "null" - ] - }, - "dataset": { - "description": "Dataset id", - "type": "string" - }, - "datasetTitle": { - "type": "string" - }, - "dateChecked": { - "description": "YYYY-MM-DD the record was last checked against its source", - "type": [ - "string", - "null" - ] - }, - "doi": { - "description": "Version DOI", - "type": [ - "string", - "null" - ] - }, - "doiUrl": { - "type": [ - "string", - "null" - ] - }, - "line": { - "description": "The same facts as one sentence, to quote under an answer", - "type": "string" - }, - "publisher": { - "description": "Publisher of the dataset", - "type": "string" - }, - "recordId": { - "description": "Stable id of the record", - "type": [ - "string", - "null" - ] - }, - "retrievedAt": { - "description": "ISO 8601 time this answer was served", - "type": "string" - }, - "source": { - "description": "The original source: statute, rule, bar opinion, court report, agency table or platform policy", - "type": [ - "string", - "null" - ] - }, - "sourceKind": { - "description": "primary or secondary", - "type": [ - "string", - "null" - ] - }, - "sourceUrl": { - "type": [ - "string", - "null" - ] - }, - "status": { - "description": "P primary source, S secondary, D default (no specific rule found), U open question", - "type": [ - "string", - "null" - ] - }, - "version": { - "description": "Dataset version", - "type": "string" - } - }, - "required": [ - "publisher", - "dataset", - "version", - "retrievedAt" - ], - "type": "object" - } -}
- Changed
list_datasets2 fields changed- removed
Input schema / properties / detail / descriptionRemoved value: -"summary (default): each record as its id, a 1-2 sentence text, status, date checked, one source URL and the page to cite. full: every field, every source and the per-record provenance." - removed
Output schema / propertiesRemoved value: -{ - "meta": { - "description": "Credit line (attribution), citation, DOI, version, license (CC BY 4.0), disclaimer, notice and the page to cite", - "required": [ - "attribution", - "license", - "disclaimer", - "notice" - ], - "type": "object" - }, - "nextCursor": { - "description": "Pass as `cursor` to get the next page; null on the last page", - "type": [ - "string", - "null" - ] - }, - "provenance": { - "description": "Where this came from: the publisher of the dataset, the dataset and its version DOI, the record id, the original source (who published it and its URL), the day that source was last checked, and when this answer was retrieved", - "properties": { - "citeUrl": { - "description": "The page to cite", - "type": [ - "string", - "null" - ] - }, - "dataset": { - "description": "Dataset id", - "type": "string" - }, - "datasetTitle": { - "type": "string" - }, - "dateChecked": { - "description": "YYYY-MM-DD the record was last checked against its source", - "type": [ - "string", - "null" - ] - }, - "doi": { - "description": "Version DOI", - "type": [ - "string", - "null" - ] - }, - "doiUrl": { - "type": [ - "string", - "null" - ] - }, - "line": { - "description": "The same facts as one sentence, to quote under an answer", - "type": "string" - }, - "publisher": { - "description": "Publisher of the dataset", - "type": "string" - }, - "recordId": { - "description": "Stable id of the record", - "type": [ - "string", - "null" - ] - }, - "retrievedAt": { - "description": "ISO 8601 time this answer was served", - "type": "string" - }, - "source": { - "description": "The original source: statute, rule, bar opinion, court report, agency table or platform policy", - "type": [ - "string", - "null" - ] - }, - "sourceKind": { - "description": "primary or secondary", - "type": [ - "string", - "null" - ] - }, - "sourceUrl": { - "type": [ - "string", - "null" - ] - }, - "status": { - "description": "P primary source, S secondary, D default (no specific rule found), U open question", - "type": [ - "string", - "null" - ] - }, - "version": { - "description": "Dataset version", - "type": "string" - } - }, - "required": [ - "publisher", - "dataset", - "version", - "retrievedAt" - ], - "type": "object" - } -}
- Changed
list_mdl_dockets3 fields changed- changed
Input schema / properties / cursor / descriptionPrevious value: -"The nextCursor from the previous page; leave out for the first page"New value: +"The nextCursor from the previous page; leave out for the first…" - removed
Input schema / properties / detail / descriptionRemoved value: -"summary (default): each record as its id, a 1-2 sentence text, status, date checked, one source URL and the page to cite. full: every field, every source and the per-record provenance." - removed
Output schema / propertiesRemoved value: -{ - "meta": { - "description": "Credit line (attribution), citation, DOI, version, license (CC BY 4.0), disclaimer, notice and the page to cite", - "required": [ - "attribution", - "license", - "disclaimer", - "notice" - ], - "type": "object" - }, - "nextCursor": { - "description": "Pass as `cursor` to get the next page; null on the last page", - "type": [ - "string", - "null" - ] - }, - "provenance": { - "description": "Where this came from: the publisher of the dataset, the dataset and its version DOI, the record id, the original source (who published it and its URL), the day that source was last checked, and when this answer was retrieved", - "properties": { - "citeUrl": { - "description": "The page to cite", - "type": [ - "string", - "null" - ] - }, - "dataset": { - "description": "Dataset id", - "type": "string" - }, - "datasetTitle": { - "type": "string" - }, - "dateChecked": { - "description": "YYYY-MM-DD the record was last checked against its source", - "type": [ - "string", - "null" - ] - }, - "doi": { - "description": "Version DOI", - "type": [ - "string", - "null" - ] - }, - "doiUrl": { - "type": [ - "string", - "null" - ] - }, - "line": { - "description": "The same facts as one sentence, to quote under an answer", - "type": "string" - }, - "publisher": { - "description": "Publisher of the dataset", - "type": "string" - }, - "recordId": { - "description": "Stable id of the record", - "type": [ - "string", - "null" - ] - }, - "retrievedAt": { - "description": "ISO 8601 time this answer was served", - "type": "string" - }, - "source": { - "description": "The original source: statute, rule, bar opinion, court report, agency table or platform policy", - "type": [ - "string", - "null" - ] - }, - "sourceKind": { - "description": "primary or secondary", - "type": [ - "string", - "null" - ] - }, - "sourceUrl": { - "type": [ - "string", - "null" - ] - }, - "status": { - "description": "P primary source, S secondary, D default (no specific rule found), U open question", - "type": [ - "string", - "null" - ] - }, - "version": { - "description": "Dataset version", - "type": "string" - } - }, - "required": [ - "publisher", - "dataset", - "version", - "retrievedAt" - ], - "type": "object" - } -}
- Changed
list_rule_changes2 fields changed- removed
Input schema / properties / detail / descriptionRemoved value: -"summary (default): each record as its id, a 1-2 sentence text, status, date checked, one source URL and the page to cite. full: every field, every source and the per-record provenance." - removed
Output schema / propertiesRemoved value: -{ - "meta": { - "description": "Credit line (attribution), citation, DOI, version, license (CC BY 4.0), disclaimer, notice and the page to cite", - "required": [ - "attribution", - "license", - "disclaimer", - "notice" - ], - "type": "object" - }, - "nextCursor": { - "description": "Pass as `cursor` to get the next page; null on the last page", - "type": [ - "string", - "null" - ] - }, - "provenance": { - "description": "Where this came from: the publisher of the dataset, the dataset and its version DOI, the record id, the original source (who published it and its URL), the day that source was last checked, and when this answer was retrieved", - "properties": { - "citeUrl": { - "description": "The page to cite", - "type": [ - "string", - "null" - ] - }, - "dataset": { - "description": "Dataset id", - "type": "string" - }, - "datasetTitle": { - "type": "string" - }, - "dateChecked": { - "description": "YYYY-MM-DD the record was last checked against its source", - "type": [ - "string", - "null" - ] - }, - "doi": { - "description": "Version DOI", - "type": [ - "string", - "null" - ] - }, - "doiUrl": { - "type": [ - "string", - "null" - ] - }, - "line": { - "description": "The same facts as one sentence, to quote under an answer", - "type": "string" - }, - "publisher": { - "description": "Publisher of the dataset", - "type": "string" - }, - "recordId": { - "description": "Stable id of the record", - "type": [ - "string", - "null" - ] - }, - "retrievedAt": { - "description": "ISO 8601 time this answer was served", - "type": "string" - }, - "source": { - "description": "The original source: statute, rule, bar opinion, court report, agency table or platform policy", - "type": [ - "string", - "null" - ] - }, - "sourceKind": { - "description": "primary or secondary", - "type": [ - "string", - "null" - ] - }, - "sourceUrl": { - "type": [ - "string", - "null" - ] - }, - "status": { - "description": "P primary source, S secondary, D default (no specific rule found), U open question", - "type": [ - "string", - "null" - ] - }, - "version": { - "description": "Dataset version", - "type": "string" - } - }, - "required": [ - "publisher", - "dataset", - "version", - "retrievedAt" - ], - "type": "object" - } -}
- Changed
search1 field changed- removed
Output schema / propertiesRemoved value: -{ - "results": { - "items": { - "properties": { - "id": { - "type": "string" - }, - "title": { - "type": "string" - }, - "url": { - "type": "string" - } - }, - "required": [ - "id", - "title", - "url" - ], - "type": "object" - }, - "type": "array" - } -}
- Changed
search_ethics_opinions5 fields changed- changed
Input schema / properties / cursor / descriptionPrevious value: -"The nextCursor from the previous page; leave out for the first page"New value: +"The nextCursor from the previous page; leave out for the first…" - removed
Input schema / properties / detail / descriptionRemoved value: -"summary (default): each record as its id, a 1-2 sentence text, status, date checked, one source URL and the page to cite. full: every field, every source and the per-record provenance." - added
Input schema / properties / topic / descriptionAdded value: +"One of 27 values, e.g. advertising-general, fee-sharing, trade-names" - removed
Input schema / properties / topic / enumRemoved value: -[ - "advertising-general", - "fee-sharing", - "trade-names", - "solicitation", - "lawyer-platforms", - "reviews", - "lead-generators", - "referral-services", - "websites", - "social-media", - "awards-ratings", - "testimonials", - "past-results", - "specialist-claims", - "office-address", - "competitor-keywords", - "pay-per-lead", - "client-intake", - "ai", - "ai-tools", - "domain-names", - "chatbots", - "client-lists-case-results", - "texting", - "spanish-or-other-language", - "waiting-period", - "call-recording" -] - removed
Output schema / propertiesRemoved value: -{ - "meta": { - "description": "Credit line (attribution), citation, DOI, version, license (CC BY 4.0), disclaimer, notice and the page to cite", - "required": [ - "attribution", - "license", - "disclaimer", - "notice" - ], - "type": "object" - }, - "nextCursor": { - "description": "Pass as `cursor` to get the next page; null on the last page", - "type": [ - "string", - "null" - ] - }, - "provenance": { - "description": "Where this came from: the publisher of the dataset, the dataset and its version DOI, the record id, the original source (who published it and its URL), the day that source was last checked, and when this answer was retrieved", - "properties": { - "citeUrl": { - "description": "The page to cite", - "type": [ - "string", - "null" - ] - }, - "dataset": { - "description": "Dataset id", - "type": "string" - }, - "datasetTitle": { - "type": "string" - }, - "dateChecked": { - "description": "YYYY-MM-DD the record was last checked against its source", - "type": [ - "string", - "null" - ] - }, - "doi": { - "description": "Version DOI", - "type": [ - "string", - "null" - ] - }, - "doiUrl": { - "type": [ - "string", - "null" - ] - }, - "line": { - "description": "The same facts as one sentence, to quote under an answer", - "type": "string" - }, - "publisher": { - "description": "Publisher of the dataset", - "type": "string" - }, - "recordId": { - "description": "Stable id of the record", - "type": [ - "string", - "null" - ] - }, - "retrievedAt": { - "description": "ISO 8601 time this answer was served", - "type": "string" - }, - "source": { - "description": "The original source: statute, rule, bar opinion, court report, agency table or platform policy", - "type": [ - "string", - "null" - ] - }, - "sourceKind": { - "description": "primary or secondary", - "type": [ - "string", - "null" - ] - }, - "sourceUrl": { - "type": [ - "string", - "null" - ] - }, - "status": { - "description": "P primary source, S secondary, D default (no specific rule found), U open question", - "type": [ - "string", - "null" - ] - }, - "version": { - "description": "Dataset version", - "type": "string" - } - }, - "required": [ - "publisher", - "dataset", - "version", - "retrievedAt" - ], - "type": "object" - } -}
- Changed
search_rules2 fields changed- removed
Input schema / properties / detail / descriptionRemoved value: -"summary (default): each record as its id, a 1-2 sentence text, status, date checked, one source URL and the page to cite. full: every field, every source and the per-record provenance." - removed
Output schema / propertiesRemoved value: -{ - "meta": { - "description": "Credit line (attribution), citation, DOI, version, license (CC BY 4.0), disclaimer, notice and the page to cite", - "required": [ - "attribution", - "license", - "disclaimer", - "notice" - ], - "type": "object" - }, - "nextCursor": { - "description": "Pass as `cursor` to get the next page; null on the last page", - "type": [ - "string", - "null" - ] - }, - "provenance": { - "description": "Where this came from: the publisher of the dataset, the dataset and its version DOI, the record id, the original source (who published it and its URL), the day that source was last checked, and when this answer was retrieved", - "properties": { - "citeUrl": { - "description": "The page to cite", - "type": [ - "string", - "null" - ] - }, - "dataset": { - "description": "Dataset id", - "type": "string" - }, - "datasetTitle": { - "type": "string" - }, - "dateChecked": { - "description": "YYYY-MM-DD the record was last checked against its source", - "type": [ - "string", - "null" - ] - }, - "doi": { - "description": "Version DOI", - "type": [ - "string", - "null" - ] - }, - "doiUrl": { - "type": [ - "string", - "null" - ] - }, - "line": { - "description": "The same facts as one sentence, to quote under an answer", - "type": "string" - }, - "publisher": { - "description": "Publisher of the dataset", - "type": "string" - }, - "recordId": { - "description": "Stable id of the record", - "type": [ - "string", - "null" - ] - }, - "retrievedAt": { - "description": "ISO 8601 time this answer was served", - "type": "string" - }, - "source": { - "description": "The original source: statute, rule, bar opinion, court report, agency table or platform policy", - "type": [ - "string", - "null" - ] - }, - "sourceKind": { - "description": "primary or secondary", - "type": [ - "string", - "null" - ] - }, - "sourceUrl": { - "type": [ - "string", - "null" - ] - }, - "status": { - "description": "P primary source, S secondary, D default (no specific rule found), U open question", - "type": [ - "string", - "null" - ] - }, - "version": { - "description": "Dataset version", - "type": "string" - } - }, - "required": [ - "publisher", - "dataset", - "version", - "retrievedAt" - ], - "type": "object" - } -}
- Changed
whats_new3 fields changed- changed
Input schema / properties / datasets / items / enumPrevious value: -[ - "rules", - "bankruptcy", - "bar-pipeline", - "benchmarks", - "ca-courts", - "civil-filings", - "consumer-complaints", - "consumer-sentinel", - "crosswalks", - "deserts", - "disability-hearings", - "eeoc-charges", - "fatal-crashes", - "fees", - "filing", - "idb-civil", - "immigration-courts", - "language", - "law-firm-economy", - "law-offices", - "lawyer-wages", - "legal-need", - "legal-prices", - "limitations", - "mdl", - "nursing-homes", - "opinions", - "platforms", - "referral", - "robocall-complaints", - "state-courts", - "veterans-representation", - "work-injuries" -]New value: +[ + "rules", + "bankruptcy", + "bar-pipeline", + "benchmarks", + "ca-courts", + "civil-filings", + "consumer-complaints", + "consumer-sentinel", + "crosswalks", + "deserts", + "disability-hearings", + "eeoc-charges", + "fatal-crashes", + "fees", + "filing", + "idb-civil", + "immigration-courts", + "language", + "law-firm-economy", + "law-offices", + "lawyer-wages", + "legal-need", + "legal-prices", + "limitations", + "mdl", + "nursing-homes", + "opinions", + "platforms", + "referral", + "robocall-complaints", + "state-courts", + "truck-crashes", + "veterans-representation", + "work-injuries" +] - removed
Input schema / properties / detail / descriptionRemoved value: -"summary (default): each record as its id, a 1-2 sentence text, status, date checked, one source URL and the page to cite. full: every field, every source and the per-record provenance." - removed
Output schema / propertiesRemoved value: -{ - "meta": { - "description": "Credit line (attribution), citation, DOI, version, license (CC BY 4.0), disclaimer, notice and the page to cite", - "required": [ - "attribution", - "license", - "disclaimer", - "notice" - ], - "type": "object" - }, - "nextCursor": { - "description": "Pass as `cursor` to get the next page; null on the last page", - "type": [ - "string", - "null" - ] - }, - "provenance": { - "description": "Where this came from: the publisher of the dataset, the dataset and its version DOI, the record id, the original source (who published it and its URL), the day that source was last checked, and when this answer was retrieved", - "properties": { - "citeUrl": { - "description": "The page to cite", - "type": [ - "string", - "null" - ] - }, - "dataset": { - "description": "Dataset id", - "type": "string" - }, - "datasetTitle": { - "type": "string" - }, - "dateChecked": { - "description": "YYYY-MM-DD the record was last checked against its source", - "type": [ - "string", - "null" - ] - }, - "doi": { - "description": "Version DOI", - "type": [ - "string", - "null" - ] - }, - "doiUrl": { - "type": [ - "string", - "null" - ] - }, - "line": { - "description": "The same facts as one sentence, to quote under an answer", - "type": "string" - }, - "publisher": { - "description": "Publisher of the dataset", - "type": "string" - }, - "recordId": { - "description": "Stable id of the record", - "type": [ - "string", - "null" - ] - }, - "retrievedAt": { - "description": "ISO 8601 time this answer was served", - "type": "string" - }, - "source": { - "description": "The original source: statute, rule, bar opinion, court report, agency table or platform policy", - "type": [ - "string", - "null" - ] - }, - "sourceKind": { - "description": "primary or secondary", - "type": [ - "string", - "null" - ] - }, - "sourceUrl": { - "type": [ - "string", - "null" - ] - }, - "status": { - "description": "P primary source, S secondary, D default (no specific rule found), U open question", - "type": [ - "string", - "null" - ] - }, - "version": { - "description": "Dataset version", - "type": "string" - } - }, - "required": [ - "publisher", - "dataset", - "version", - "retrievedAt" - ], - "type": "object" - } -}
5 tool updates
- Changed
cite1 field changed- changed
Input schema / properties / dataset / enumPrevious value: -[ - "rules", - "bankruptcy", - "bar-pipeline", - "benchmarks", - "ca-courts", - "civil-filings", - "consumer-complaints", - "deserts", - "eeoc-charges", - "fatal-crashes", - "fees", - "filing", - "idb-civil", - "immigration-courts", - "language", - "law-firm-economy", - "law-offices", - "lawyer-wages", - "legal-prices", - "limitations", - "mdl", - "opinions", - "platforms", - "referral", - "robocall-complaints", - "state-courts", - "veterans-representation", - "work-injuries" -]New value: +[ + "rules", + "bankruptcy", + "bar-pipeline", + "benchmarks", + "ca-courts", + "civil-filings", + "consumer-complaints", + "consumer-sentinel", + "crosswalks", + "deserts", + "disability-hearings", + "eeoc-charges", + "fatal-crashes", + "fees", + "filing", + "idb-civil", + "immigration-courts", + "language", + "law-firm-economy", + "law-offices", + "lawyer-wages", + "legal-need", + "legal-prices", + "limitations", + "mdl", + "nursing-homes", + "opinions", + "platforms", + "referral", + "robocall-complaints", + "state-courts", + "veterans-representation", + "work-injuries" +]
- Changed
data_compare1 field changed- changed
Input schema / properties / dataset / enumPrevious value: -[ - "bankruptcy", - "bar-pipeline", - "benchmarks", - "ca-courts", - "civil-filings", - "consumer-complaints", - "deserts", - "eeoc-charges", - "fatal-crashes", - "fees", - "filing", - "idb-civil", - "immigration-courts", - "language", - "law-firm-economy", - "law-offices", - "lawyer-wages", - "legal-prices", - "limitations", - "mdl", - "opinions", - "platforms", - "referral", - "robocall-complaints", - "state-courts", - "veterans-representation", - "work-injuries" -]New value: +[ + "bankruptcy", + "bar-pipeline", + "benchmarks", + "ca-courts", + "civil-filings", + "consumer-complaints", + "consumer-sentinel", + "crosswalks", + "deserts", + "disability-hearings", + "eeoc-charges", + "fatal-crashes", + "fees", + "filing", + "idb-civil", + "immigration-courts", + "language", + "law-firm-economy", + "law-offices", + "lawyer-wages", + "legal-need", + "legal-prices", + "limitations", + "mdl", + "nursing-homes", + "opinions", + "platforms", + "referral", + "robocall-complaints", + "state-courts", + "veterans-representation", + "work-injuries" +]
- Changed
data_lookup1 field changed- changed
Input schema / properties / dataset / enumPrevious value: -[ - "bankruptcy", - "bar-pipeline", - "benchmarks", - "ca-courts", - "civil-filings", - "consumer-complaints", - "deserts", - "eeoc-charges", - "fatal-crashes", - "fees", - "filing", - "idb-civil", - "immigration-courts", - "language", - "law-firm-economy", - "law-offices", - "lawyer-wages", - "legal-prices", - "limitations", - "mdl", - "opinions", - "platforms", - "referral", - "robocall-complaints", - "state-courts", - "veterans-representation", - "work-injuries" -]New value: +[ + "bankruptcy", + "bar-pipeline", + "benchmarks", + "ca-courts", + "civil-filings", + "consumer-complaints", + "consumer-sentinel", + "crosswalks", + "deserts", + "disability-hearings", + "eeoc-charges", + "fatal-crashes", + "fees", + "filing", + "idb-civil", + "immigration-courts", + "language", + "law-firm-economy", + "law-offices", + "lawyer-wages", + "legal-need", + "legal-prices", + "limitations", + "mdl", + "nursing-homes", + "opinions", + "platforms", + "referral", + "robocall-complaints", + "state-courts", + "veterans-representation", + "work-injuries" +]
- Changed
data_search1 field changed- changed
Input schema / properties / datasets / items / enumPrevious value: -[ - "bankruptcy", - "bar-pipeline", - "benchmarks", - "ca-courts", - "civil-filings", - "consumer-complaints", - "deserts", - "eeoc-charges", - "fatal-crashes", - "fees", - "filing", - "idb-civil", - "immigration-courts", - "language", - "law-firm-economy", - "law-offices", - "lawyer-wages", - "legal-prices", - "limitations", - "mdl", - "opinions", - "platforms", - "referral", - "robocall-complaints", - "state-courts", - "veterans-representation", - "work-injuries" -]New value: +[ + "bankruptcy", + "bar-pipeline", + "benchmarks", + "ca-courts", + "civil-filings", + "consumer-complaints", + "consumer-sentinel", + "crosswalks", + "deserts", + "disability-hearings", + "eeoc-charges", + "fatal-crashes", + "fees", + "filing", + "idb-civil", + "immigration-courts", + "language", + "law-firm-economy", + "law-offices", + "lawyer-wages", + "legal-need", + "legal-prices", + "limitations", + "mdl", + "nursing-homes", + "opinions", + "platforms", + "referral", + "robocall-complaints", + "state-courts", + "veterans-representation", + "work-injuries" +]
- Changed
whats_new1 field changed- changed
Input schema / properties / datasets / items / enumPrevious value: -[ - "rules", - "bankruptcy", - "bar-pipeline", - "benchmarks", - "ca-courts", - "civil-filings", - "consumer-complaints", - "deserts", - "eeoc-charges", - "fatal-crashes", - "fees", - "filing", - "idb-civil", - "immigration-courts", - "language", - "law-firm-economy", - "law-offices", - "lawyer-wages", - "legal-prices", - "limitations", - "mdl", - "opinions", - "platforms", - "referral", - "robocall-complaints", - "state-courts", - "veterans-representation", - "work-injuries" -]New value: +[ + "rules", + "bankruptcy", + "bar-pipeline", + "benchmarks", + "ca-courts", + "civil-filings", + "consumer-complaints", + "consumer-sentinel", + "crosswalks", + "deserts", + "disability-hearings", + "eeoc-charges", + "fatal-crashes", + "fees", + "filing", + "idb-civil", + "immigration-courts", + "language", + "law-firm-economy", + "law-offices", + "lawyer-wages", + "legal-need", + "legal-prices", + "limitations", + "mdl", + "nursing-homes", + "opinions", + "platforms", + "referral", + "robocall-complaints", + "state-courts", + "veterans-representation", + "work-injuries" +]
5 tool updates
- Changed
cite1 field changed- changed
Input schema / properties / dataset / enumPrevious value: -[ - "rules", - "bar-pipeline", - "benchmarks", - "ca-courts", - "civil-filings", - "consumer-complaints", - "deserts", - "eeoc-charges", - "fatal-crashes", - "fees", - "filing", - "language", - "law-offices", - "lawyer-wages", - "legal-prices", - "limitations", - "mdl", - "opinions", - "platforms", - "referral", - "robocall-complaints", - "state-courts" -]New value: +[ + "rules", + "bankruptcy", + "bar-pipeline", + "benchmarks", + "ca-courts", + "civil-filings", + "consumer-complaints", + "deserts", + "eeoc-charges", + "fatal-crashes", + "fees", + "filing", + "idb-civil", + "immigration-courts", + "language", + "law-firm-economy", + "law-offices", + "lawyer-wages", + "legal-prices", + "limitations", + "mdl", + "opinions", + "platforms", + "referral", + "robocall-complaints", + "state-courts", + "veterans-representation", + "work-injuries" +]
- Changed
data_compare1 field changed- changed
Input schema / properties / dataset / enumPrevious value: -[ - "bar-pipeline", - "benchmarks", - "ca-courts", - "civil-filings", - "consumer-complaints", - "deserts", - "eeoc-charges", - "fatal-crashes", - "fees", - "filing", - "language", - "law-offices", - "lawyer-wages", - "legal-prices", - "limitations", - "mdl", - "opinions", - "platforms", - "referral", - "robocall-complaints", - "state-courts" -]New value: +[ + "bankruptcy", + "bar-pipeline", + "benchmarks", + "ca-courts", + "civil-filings", + "consumer-complaints", + "deserts", + "eeoc-charges", + "fatal-crashes", + "fees", + "filing", + "idb-civil", + "immigration-courts", + "language", + "law-firm-economy", + "law-offices", + "lawyer-wages", + "legal-prices", + "limitations", + "mdl", + "opinions", + "platforms", + "referral", + "robocall-complaints", + "state-courts", + "veterans-representation", + "work-injuries" +]
- Changed
data_lookup1 field changed- changed
Input schema / properties / dataset / enumPrevious value: -[ - "bar-pipeline", - "benchmarks", - "ca-courts", - "civil-filings", - "consumer-complaints", - "deserts", - "eeoc-charges", - "fatal-crashes", - "fees", - "filing", - "language", - "law-offices", - "lawyer-wages", - "legal-prices", - "limitations", - "mdl", - "opinions", - "platforms", - "referral", - "robocall-complaints", - "state-courts" -]New value: +[ + "bankruptcy", + "bar-pipeline", + "benchmarks", + "ca-courts", + "civil-filings", + "consumer-complaints", + "deserts", + "eeoc-charges", + "fatal-crashes", + "fees", + "filing", + "idb-civil", + "immigration-courts", + "language", + "law-firm-economy", + "law-offices", + "lawyer-wages", + "legal-prices", + "limitations", + "mdl", + "opinions", + "platforms", + "referral", + "robocall-complaints", + "state-courts", + "veterans-representation", + "work-injuries" +]
- Changed
data_search1 field changed- changed
Input schema / properties / datasets / items / enumPrevious value: -[ - "bar-pipeline", - "benchmarks", - "ca-courts", - "civil-filings", - "consumer-complaints", - "deserts", - "eeoc-charges", - "fatal-crashes", - "fees", - "filing", - "language", - "law-offices", - "lawyer-wages", - "legal-prices", - "limitations", - "mdl", - "opinions", - "platforms", - "referral", - "robocall-complaints", - "state-courts" -]New value: +[ + "bankruptcy", + "bar-pipeline", + "benchmarks", + "ca-courts", + "civil-filings", + "consumer-complaints", + "deserts", + "eeoc-charges", + "fatal-crashes", + "fees", + "filing", + "idb-civil", + "immigration-courts", + "language", + "law-firm-economy", + "law-offices", + "lawyer-wages", + "legal-prices", + "limitations", + "mdl", + "opinions", + "platforms", + "referral", + "robocall-complaints", + "state-courts", + "veterans-representation", + "work-injuries" +]
- Changed
whats_new1 field changed- changed
Input schema / properties / datasets / items / enumPrevious value: -[ - "rules", - "bar-pipeline", - "benchmarks", - "ca-courts", - "civil-filings", - "consumer-complaints", - "deserts", - "eeoc-charges", - "fatal-crashes", - "fees", - "filing", - "language", - "law-offices", - "lawyer-wages", - "legal-prices", - "limitations", - "mdl", - "opinions", - "platforms", - "referral", - "robocall-complaints", - "state-courts" -]New value: +[ + "rules", + "bankruptcy", + "bar-pipeline", + "benchmarks", + "ca-courts", + "civil-filings", + "consumer-complaints", + "deserts", + "eeoc-charges", + "fatal-crashes", + "fees", + "filing", + "idb-civil", + "immigration-courts", + "language", + "law-firm-economy", + "law-offices", + "lawyer-wages", + "legal-prices", + "limitations", + "mdl", + "opinions", + "platforms", + "referral", + "robocall-complaints", + "state-courts", + "veterans-representation", + "work-injuries" +]
7 tool updates
- Changed
cite1 field changed- changed
Input schema / properties / dataset / enumPrevious value: -[ - "rules", - "benchmarks", - "ca-courts", - "fees", - "filing", - "language", - "mdl", - "opinions", - "platforms", - "referral" -]New value: +[ + "rules", + "bar-pipeline", + "benchmarks", + "ca-courts", + "civil-filings", + "consumer-complaints", + "deserts", + "eeoc-charges", + "fatal-crashes", + "fees", + "filing", + "language", + "law-offices", + "lawyer-wages", + "legal-prices", + "limitations", + "mdl", + "opinions", + "platforms", + "referral", + "robocall-complaints", + "state-courts" +]
- Changed
data_compare1 field changed- changed
Input schema / properties / dataset / enumPrevious value: -[ - "benchmarks", - "ca-courts", - "fees", - "filing", - "language", - "mdl", - "opinions", - "platforms", - "referral" -]New value: +[ + "bar-pipeline", + "benchmarks", + "ca-courts", + "civil-filings", + "consumer-complaints", + "deserts", + "eeoc-charges", + "fatal-crashes", + "fees", + "filing", + "language", + "law-offices", + "lawyer-wages", + "legal-prices", + "limitations", + "mdl", + "opinions", + "platforms", + "referral", + "robocall-complaints", + "state-courts" +]
- Changed
data_lookup1 field changed- changed
Input schema / properties / dataset / enumPrevious value: -[ - "benchmarks", - "ca-courts", - "fees", - "filing", - "language", - "mdl", - "opinions", - "platforms", - "referral" -]New value: +[ + "bar-pipeline", + "benchmarks", + "ca-courts", + "civil-filings", + "consumer-complaints", + "deserts", + "eeoc-charges", + "fatal-crashes", + "fees", + "filing", + "language", + "law-offices", + "lawyer-wages", + "legal-prices", + "limitations", + "mdl", + "opinions", + "platforms", + "referral", + "robocall-complaints", + "state-courts" +]
- Changed
data_search1 field changed- changed
Input schema / properties / datasets / items / enumPrevious value: -[ - "benchmarks", - "ca-courts", - "fees", - "filing", - "language", - "mdl", - "opinions", - "platforms", - "referral" -]New value: +[ + "bar-pipeline", + "benchmarks", + "ca-courts", + "civil-filings", + "consumer-complaints", + "deserts", + "eeoc-charges", + "fatal-crashes", + "fees", + "filing", + "language", + "law-offices", + "lawyer-wages", + "legal-prices", + "limitations", + "mdl", + "opinions", + "platforms", + "referral", + "robocall-complaints", + "state-courts" +]
- Added
get_state_market_brief - Changed
search_ethics_opinions1 field changed- changed
Input schema / properties / topic / enumPrevious value: -[ - "advertising-general", - "fee-sharing", - "trade-names", - "solicitation", - "lawyer-platforms", - "reviews", - "lead-generators", - "referral-services", - "websites", - "social-media", - "awards-ratings", - "testimonials", - "past-results", - "specialist-claims", - "office-address", - "competitor-keywords", - "pay-per-lead", - "client-intake", - "ai-tools", - "domain-names", - "chatbots", - "client-lists-case-results", - "texting", - "spanish-or-other-language", - "waiting-period", - "call-recording" -]New value: +[ + "advertising-general", + "fee-sharing", + "trade-names", + "solicitation", + "lawyer-platforms", + "reviews", + "lead-generators", + "referral-services", + "websites", + "social-media", + "awards-ratings", + "testimonials", + "past-results", + "specialist-claims", + "office-address", + "competitor-keywords", + "pay-per-lead", + "client-intake", + "ai", + "ai-tools", + "domain-names", + "chatbots", + "client-lists-case-results", + "texting", + "spanish-or-other-language", + "waiting-period", + "call-recording" +]
- Changed
whats_new1 field changed- changed
Input schema / properties / datasets / items / enumPrevious value: -[ - "rules", - "benchmarks", - "ca-courts", - "fees", - "filing", - "language", - "mdl", - "opinions", - "platforms", - "referral" -]New value: +[ + "rules", + "bar-pipeline", + "benchmarks", + "ca-courts", + "civil-filings", + "consumer-complaints", + "deserts", + "eeoc-charges", + "fatal-crashes", + "fees", + "filing", + "language", + "law-offices", + "lawyer-wages", + "legal-prices", + "limitations", + "mdl", + "opinions", + "platforms", + "referral", + "robocall-complaints", + "state-courts" +]
23 tool updates
- Added
calculate_fee_cap - Added
check_ad_elements - Changed
cite2 fields changed- changed
Input schema / properties / dataset / enumPrevious value: -[ - "rules", - "ca-courts", - "fees", - "filing", - "language", - "mdl", - "opinions", - "platforms" -]New value: +[ + "rules", + "benchmarks", + "ca-courts", + "fees", + "filing", + "language", + "mdl", + "opinions", + "platforms", + "referral" +] - added
Input schema / properties / detailAdded value: +{ + "default": "summary", + "description": "summary (default): each record as its id, a 1-2 sentence text, status, date checked, one source URL and the page to cite. full: every field, every source and the per-record provenance.", + "enum": [ + "summary", + "full" + ], + "type": "string" +}
- Changed
compare_states1 field changed- added
Input schema / properties / detailAdded value: +{ + "default": "summary", + "description": "summary (default): each record as its id, a 1-2 sentence text, status, date checked, one source URL and the page to cite. full: every field, every source and the per-record provenance.", + "enum": [ + "summary", + "full" + ], + "type": "string" +}
- Changed
data_compare2 fields changed- changed
Input schema / properties / dataset / enumPrevious value: -[ - "ca-courts", - "fees", - "filing", - "language", - "mdl", - "opinions", - "platforms" -]New value: +[ + "benchmarks", + "ca-courts", + "fees", + "filing", + "language", + "mdl", + "opinions", + "platforms", + "referral" +] - added
Input schema / properties / detailAdded value: +{ + "default": "summary", + "description": "summary (default): each record as its id, a 1-2 sentence text, status, date checked, one source URL and the page to cite. full: every field, every source and the per-record provenance.", + "enum": [ + "summary", + "full" + ], + "type": "string" +}
- Changed
data_lookup2 fields changed- changed
Input schema / properties / dataset / enumPrevious value: -[ - "ca-courts", - "fees", - "filing", - "language", - "mdl", - "opinions", - "platforms" -]New value: +[ + "benchmarks", + "ca-courts", + "fees", + "filing", + "language", + "mdl", + "opinions", + "platforms", + "referral" +] - added
Input schema / properties / detailAdded value: +{ + "default": "summary", + "description": "summary (default): each record as its id, a 1-2 sentence text, status, date checked, one source URL and the page to cite. full: every field, every source and the per-record provenance.", + "enum": [ + "summary", + "full" + ], + "type": "string" +}
- Changed
data_search3 fields changed- changed
Input schema / properties / datasets / items / enumPrevious value: -[ - "ca-courts", - "fees", - "filing", - "language", - "mdl", - "opinions", - "platforms" -]New value: +[ + "benchmarks", + "ca-courts", + "fees", + "filing", + "language", + "mdl", + "opinions", + "platforms", + "referral" +] - added
Input schema / properties / detailAdded value: +{ + "default": "summary", + "description": "summary (default): each record as its id, a 1-2 sentence text, status, date checked, one source URL and the page to cite. full: every field, every source and the per-record provenance.", + "enum": [ + "summary", + "full" + ], + "type": "string" +} - changed
Input schema / properties / limit / defaultPrevious value: -8New value: +5
- Added
fetch - Changed
get_ad_filing_requirements1 field changed- added
Input schema / properties / detailAdded value: +{ + "default": "summary", + "description": "summary (default): each record as its id, a 1-2 sentence text, status, date checked, one source URL and the page to cite. full: every field, every source and the per-record provenance.", + "enum": [ + "summary", + "full" + ], + "type": "string" +}
- Changed
get_ad_platform_policies2 fields changed- added
Input schema / properties / detailAdded value: +{ + "default": "summary", + "description": "summary (default): each record as its id, a 1-2 sentence text, status, date checked, one source URL and the page to cite. full: every field, every source and the per-record provenance.", + "enum": [ + "summary", + "full" + ], + "type": "string" +} - changed
Input schema / properties / limit / defaultPrevious value: -10New value: +5
- Changed
get_attorney_fee_caps1 field changed- added
Input schema / properties / detailAdded value: +{ + "default": "summary", + "description": "summary (default): each record as its id, a 1-2 sentence text, status, date checked, one source URL and the page to cite. full: every field, every source and the per-record provenance.", + "enum": [ + "summary", + "full" + ], + "type": "string" +}
- Added
get_benchmark - Changed
get_ca_court_filings1 field changed- added
Input schema / properties / detailAdded value: +{ + "default": "summary", + "description": "summary (default): each record as its id, a 1-2 sentence text, status, date checked, one source URL and the page to cite. full: every field, every source and the per-record provenance.", + "enum": [ + "summary", + "full" + ], + "type": "string" +}
- Changed
get_rule1 field changed- added
Input schema / properties / detailAdded value: +{ + "default": "summary", + "description": "summary (default): each record as its id, a 1-2 sentence text, status, date checked, one source URL and the page to cite. full: every field, every source and the per-record provenance.", + "enum": [ + "summary", + "full" + ], + "type": "string" +}
- Changed
get_spanish_demand_supply1 field changed- added
Input schema / properties / detailAdded value: +{ + "default": "summary", + "description": "summary (default): each record as its id, a 1-2 sentence text, status, date checked, one source URL and the page to cite. full: every field, every source and the per-record provenance.", + "enum": [ + "summary", + "full" + ], + "type": "string" +}
- Changed
get_state_rules1 field changed- added
Input schema / properties / detailAdded value: +{ + "default": "summary", + "description": "summary (default): each record as its id, a 1-2 sentence text, status, date checked, one source URL and the page to cite. full: every field, every source and the per-record provenance.", + "enum": [ + "summary", + "full" + ], + "type": "string" +}
- Changed
list_datasets1 field changed- added
Input schema / properties / detailAdded value: +{ + "default": "summary", + "description": "summary (default): each record as its id, a 1-2 sentence text, status, date checked, one source URL and the page to cite. full: every field, every source and the per-record provenance.", + "enum": [ + "summary", + "full" + ], + "type": "string" +}
- Changed
list_mdl_dockets2 fields changed- added
Input schema / properties / detailAdded value: +{ + "default": "summary", + "description": "summary (default): each record as its id, a 1-2 sentence text, status, date checked, one source URL and the page to cite. full: every field, every source and the per-record provenance.", + "enum": [ + "summary", + "full" + ], + "type": "string" +} - changed
Input schema / properties / limit / defaultPrevious value: -10New value: +5
- Changed
list_rule_changes1 field changed- added
Input schema / properties / detailAdded value: +{ + "default": "summary", + "description": "summary (default): each record as its id, a 1-2 sentence text, status, date checked, one source URL and the page to cite. full: every field, every source and the per-record provenance.", + "enum": [ + "summary", + "full" + ], + "type": "string" +}
- Added
search - Changed
search_ethics_opinions2 fields changed- added
Input schema / properties / detailAdded value: +{ + "default": "summary", + "description": "summary (default): each record as its id, a 1-2 sentence text, status, date checked, one source URL and the page to cite. full: every field, every source and the per-record provenance.", + "enum": [ + "summary", + "full" + ], + "type": "string" +} - changed
Input schema / properties / limit / defaultPrevious value: -10New value: +5
- Changed
search_rules2 fields changed- added
Input schema / properties / detailAdded value: +{ + "default": "summary", + "description": "summary (default): each record as its id, a 1-2 sentence text, status, date checked, one source URL and the page to cite. full: every field, every source and the per-record provenance.", + "enum": [ + "summary", + "full" + ], + "type": "string" +} - changed
Input schema / properties / limit / defaultPrevious value: -8New value: +5
- Changed
whats_new3 fields changed- changed
Input schema / properties / datasets / items / enumPrevious value: -[ - "rules", - "ca-courts", - "fees", - "filing", - "language", - "mdl", - "opinions", - "platforms" -]New value: +[ + "rules", + "benchmarks", + "ca-courts", + "fees", + "filing", + "language", + "mdl", + "opinions", + "platforms", + "referral" +] - added
Input schema / properties / detailAdded value: +{ + "default": "summary", + "description": "summary (default): each record as its id, a 1-2 sentence text, status, date checked, one source URL and the page to cite. full: every field, every source and the per-record provenance.", + "enum": [ + "summary", + "full" + ], + "type": "string" +} - changed
Input schema / properties / limit / defaultPrevious value: -25New value: +5
20 tool updates
- Changed
cite5 fields changed- changed
Input schema / properties / dataset / defaultPrevious value: -"mdl"New value: +"rules" - changed
Input schema / properties / dataset / enumPrevious value: -[ - "mdl" -]New value: +[ + "rules", + "ca-courts", + "fees", + "filing", + "language", + "mdl", + "opinions", + "platforms" +] - changed
Input schema / properties / id / descriptionPrevious value: -"The record id"New value: +"Other datasets: the record id" - added
Input schema / properties / stateAdded value: +{ + "description": "rules only: two-letter code, or DC", + "maxLength": 40, + "type": "string" +} - added
Input schema / properties / topicAdded value: +{ + "description": "rules only: topic key, e.g. filing", + "maxLength": 40, + "type": "string" +}
- Added
compare_states - Added
data_compare - Added
data_lookup - Added
data_search - Added
get_ad_filing_requirements - Added
get_ad_platform_policies - Added
get_attorney_fee_caps - Added
get_ca_court_filings - Added
get_rule - Added
get_spanish_demand_supply - Added
get_state_rules - Added
list_mdl_dockets - Added
list_rule_changes - Removed
mdl_compare - Removed
mdl_lookup - Removed
mdl_search - Added
search_ethics_opinions - Added
search_rules - Changed
whats_new1 field changed- changed
Input schema / properties / datasets / items / enumPrevious value: -[ - "mdl" -]New value: +[ + "rules", + "ca-courts", + "fees", + "filing", + "language", + "mdl", + "opinions", + "platforms" +]
6 tool updates
- Changed
cite7 fields changed- changed
Input schema / properties / id / descriptionPrevious value: -"Other datasets: the record id"New value: +"The record id" - added
Input schema / properties / id / maxLengthAdded value: +120 - removed
Input schema / properties / stateRemoved value: -{ - "description": "rules only: two-letter code, or DC", - "type": "string" -} - removed
Input schema / properties / topicRemoved value: -{ - "description": "rules only: topic key, e.g. filing", - "type": "string" -} - added
Output schema / properties / nextCursorAdded value: +{ + "description": "Pass as `cursor` to get the next page; null on the last page", + "type": [ + "string", + "null" + ] +} - added
Output schema / properties / provenanceAdded value: +{ + "description": "Where this came from: the publisher of the dataset, the dataset and its version DOI, the record id, the original source (who published it and its URL), the day that source was last checked, and when this answer was retrieved", + "properties": { + "citeUrl": { + "description": "The page to cite", + "type": [ + "string", + "null" + ] + }, + "dataset": { + "description": "Dataset id", + "type": "string" + }, + "datasetTitle": { + "type": "string" + }, + "dateChecked": { + "description": "YYYY-MM-DD the record was last checked against its source", + "type": [ + "string", + "null" + ] + }, + "doi": { + "description": "Version DOI", + "type": [ + "string", + "null" + ] + }, + "doiUrl": { + "type": [ + "string", + "null" + ] + }, + "line": { + "description": "The same facts as one sentence, to quote under an answer", + "type": "string" + }, + "publisher": { + "description": "Publisher of the dataset", + "type": "string" + }, + "recordId": { + "description": "Stable id of the record", + "type": [ + "string", + "null" + ] + }, + "retrievedAt": { + "description": "ISO 8601 time this answer was served", + "type": "string" + }, + "source": { + "description": "The original source: statute, rule, bar opinion, court report, agency table or platform policy", + "type": [ + "string", + "null" + ] + }, + "sourceKind": { + "description": "primary or secondary", + "type": [ + "string", + "null" + ] + }, + "sourceUrl": { + "type": [ + "string", + "null" + ] + }, + "status": { + "description": "P primary source, S secondary, D default (no specific rule found), U open question", + "type": [ + "string", + "null" + ] + }, + "version": { + "description": "Dataset version", + "type": "string" + } + }, + "required": [ + "publisher", + "dataset", + "version", + "retrievedAt" + ], + "type": "object" +} - changed
Output schema / requiredPrevious value: -[ - "meta" -]New value: +[ + "meta", + "provenance" +]
- Changed
list_datasets3 fields changed- added
Output schema / properties / nextCursorAdded value: +{ + "description": "Pass as `cursor` to get the next page; null on the last page", + "type": [ + "string", + "null" + ] +} - added
Output schema / properties / provenanceAdded value: +{ + "description": "Where this came from: the publisher of the dataset, the dataset and its version DOI, the record id, the original source (who published it and its URL), the day that source was last checked, and when this answer was retrieved", + "properties": { + "citeUrl": { + "description": "The page to cite", + "type": [ + "string", + "null" + ] + }, + "dataset": { + "description": "Dataset id", + "type": "string" + }, + "datasetTitle": { + "type": "string" + }, + "dateChecked": { + "description": "YYYY-MM-DD the record was last checked against its source", + "type": [ + "string", + "null" + ] + }, + "doi": { + "description": "Version DOI", + "type": [ + "string", + "null" + ] + }, + "doiUrl": { + "type": [ + "string", + "null" + ] + }, + "line": { + "description": "The same facts as one sentence, to quote under an answer", + "type": "string" + }, + "publisher": { + "description": "Publisher of the dataset", + "type": "string" + }, + "recordId": { + "description": "Stable id of the record", + "type": [ + "string", + "null" + ] + }, + "retrievedAt": { + "description": "ISO 8601 time this answer was served", + "type": "string" + }, + "source": { + "description": "The original source: statute, rule, bar opinion, court report, agency table or platform policy", + "type": [ + "string", + "null" + ] + }, + "sourceKind": { + "description": "primary or secondary", + "type": [ + "string", + "null" + ] + }, + "sourceUrl": { + "type": [ + "string", + "null" + ] + }, + "status": { + "description": "P primary source, S secondary, D default (no specific rule found), U open question", + "type": [ + "string", + "null" + ] + }, + "version": { + "description": "Dataset version", + "type": "string" + } + }, + "required": [ + "publisher", + "dataset", + "version", + "retrievedAt" + ], + "type": "object" +} - changed
Output schema / requiredPrevious value: -[ - "meta" -]New value: +[ + "meta", + "provenance" +]
- Changed
mdl_compare3 fields changed- added
Output schema / properties / nextCursorAdded value: +{ + "description": "Pass as `cursor` to get the next page; null on the last page", + "type": [ + "string", + "null" + ] +} - added
Output schema / properties / provenanceAdded value: +{ + "description": "Where this came from: the publisher of the dataset, the dataset and its version DOI, the record id, the original source (who published it and its URL), the day that source was last checked, and when this answer was retrieved", + "properties": { + "citeUrl": { + "description": "The page to cite", + "type": [ + "string", + "null" + ] + }, + "dataset": { + "description": "Dataset id", + "type": "string" + }, + "datasetTitle": { + "type": "string" + }, + "dateChecked": { + "description": "YYYY-MM-DD the record was last checked against its source", + "type": [ + "string", + "null" + ] + }, + "doi": { + "description": "Version DOI", + "type": [ + "string", + "null" + ] + }, + "doiUrl": { + "type": [ + "string", + "null" + ] + }, + "line": { + "description": "The same facts as one sentence, to quote under an answer", + "type": "string" + }, + "publisher": { + "description": "Publisher of the dataset", + "type": "string" + }, + "recordId": { + "description": "Stable id of the record", + "type": [ + "string", + "null" + ] + }, + "retrievedAt": { + "description": "ISO 8601 time this answer was served", + "type": "string" + }, + "source": { + "description": "The original source: statute, rule, bar opinion, court report, agency table or platform policy", + "type": [ + "string", + "null" + ] + }, + "sourceKind": { + "description": "primary or secondary", + "type": [ + "string", + "null" + ] + }, + "sourceUrl": { + "type": [ + "string", + "null" + ] + }, + "status": { + "description": "P primary source, S secondary, D default (no specific rule found), U open question", + "type": [ + "string", + "null" + ] + }, + "version": { + "description": "Dataset version", + "type": "string" + } + }, + "required": [ + "publisher", + "dataset", + "version", + "retrievedAt" + ], + "type": "object" +} - changed
Output schema / requiredPrevious value: -[ - "meta" -]New value: +[ + "meta", + "provenance" +]
- Changed
mdl_lookup3 fields changed- added
Output schema / properties / nextCursorAdded value: +{ + "description": "Pass as `cursor` to get the next page; null on the last page", + "type": [ + "string", + "null" + ] +} - added
Output schema / properties / provenanceAdded value: +{ + "description": "Where this came from: the publisher of the dataset, the dataset and its version DOI, the record id, the original source (who published it and its URL), the day that source was last checked, and when this answer was retrieved", + "properties": { + "citeUrl": { + "description": "The page to cite", + "type": [ + "string", + "null" + ] + }, + "dataset": { + "description": "Dataset id", + "type": "string" + }, + "datasetTitle": { + "type": "string" + }, + "dateChecked": { + "description": "YYYY-MM-DD the record was last checked against its source", + "type": [ + "string", + "null" + ] + }, + "doi": { + "description": "Version DOI", + "type": [ + "string", + "null" + ] + }, + "doiUrl": { + "type": [ + "string", + "null" + ] + }, + "line": { + "description": "The same facts as one sentence, to quote under an answer", + "type": "string" + }, + "publisher": { + "description": "Publisher of the dataset", + "type": "string" + }, + "recordId": { + "description": "Stable id of the record", + "type": [ + "string", + "null" + ] + }, + "retrievedAt": { + "description": "ISO 8601 time this answer was served", + "type": "string" + }, + "source": { + "description": "The original source: statute, rule, bar opinion, court report, agency table or platform policy", + "type": [ + "string", + "null" + ] + }, + "sourceKind": { + "description": "primary or secondary", + "type": [ + "string", + "null" + ] + }, + "sourceUrl": { + "type": [ + "string", + "null" + ] + }, + "status": { + "description": "P primary source, S secondary, D default (no specific rule found), U open question", + "type": [ + "string", + "null" + ] + }, + "version": { + "description": "Dataset version", + "type": "string" + } + }, + "required": [ + "publisher", + "dataset", + "version", + "retrievedAt" + ], + "type": "object" +} - changed
Output schema / requiredPrevious value: -[ - "meta" -]New value: +[ + "meta", + "provenance" +]
- Changed
mdl_search3 fields changed- added
Output schema / properties / nextCursorAdded value: +{ + "description": "Pass as `cursor` to get the next page; null on the last page", + "type": [ + "string", + "null" + ] +} - added
Output schema / properties / provenanceAdded value: +{ + "description": "Where this came from: the publisher of the dataset, the dataset and its version DOI, the record id, the original source (who published it and its URL), the day that source was last checked, and when this answer was retrieved", + "properties": { + "citeUrl": { + "description": "The page to cite", + "type": [ + "string", + "null" + ] + }, + "dataset": { + "description": "Dataset id", + "type": "string" + }, + "datasetTitle": { + "type": "string" + }, + "dateChecked": { + "description": "YYYY-MM-DD the record was last checked against its source", + "type": [ + "string", + "null" + ] + }, + "doi": { + "description": "Version DOI", + "type": [ + "string", + "null" + ] + }, + "doiUrl": { + "type": [ + "string", + "null" + ] + }, + "line": { + "description": "The same facts as one sentence, to quote under an answer", + "type": "string" + }, + "publisher": { + "description": "Publisher of the dataset", + "type": "string" + }, + "recordId": { + "description": "Stable id of the record", + "type": [ + "string", + "null" + ] + }, + "retrievedAt": { + "description": "ISO 8601 time this answer was served", + "type": "string" + }, + "source": { + "description": "The original source: statute, rule, bar opinion, court report, agency table or platform policy", + "type": [ + "string", + "null" + ] + }, + "sourceKind": { + "description": "primary or secondary", + "type": [ + "string", + "null" + ] + }, + "sourceUrl": { + "type": [ + "string", + "null" + ] + }, + "status": { + "description": "P primary source, S secondary, D default (no specific rule found), U open question", + "type": [ + "string", + "null" + ] + }, + "version": { + "description": "Dataset version", + "type": "string" + } + }, + "required": [ + "publisher", + "dataset", + "version", + "retrievedAt" + ], + "type": "object" +} - changed
Output schema / requiredPrevious value: -[ - "meta" -]New value: +[ + "meta", + "provenance" +]
- Changed
whats_new3 fields changed- added
Output schema / properties / nextCursorAdded value: +{ + "description": "Pass as `cursor` to get the next page; null on the last page", + "type": [ + "string", + "null" + ] +} - added
Output schema / properties / provenanceAdded value: +{ + "description": "Where this came from: the publisher of the dataset, the dataset and its version DOI, the record id, the original source (who published it and its URL), the day that source was last checked, and when this answer was retrieved", + "properties": { + "citeUrl": { + "description": "The page to cite", + "type": [ + "string", + "null" + ] + }, + "dataset": { + "description": "Dataset id", + "type": "string" + }, + "datasetTitle": { + "type": "string" + }, + "dateChecked": { + "description": "YYYY-MM-DD the record was last checked against its source", + "type": [ + "string", + "null" + ] + }, + "doi": { + "description": "Version DOI", + "type": [ + "string", + "null" + ] + }, + "doiUrl": { + "type": [ + "string", + "null" + ] + }, + "line": { + "description": "The same facts as one sentence, to quote under an answer", + "type": "string" + }, + "publisher": { + "description": "Publisher of the dataset", + "type": "string" + }, + "recordId": { + "description": "Stable id of the record", + "type": [ + "string", + "null" + ] + }, + "retrievedAt": { + "description": "ISO 8601 time this answer was served", + "type": "string" + }, + "source": { + "description": "The original source: statute, rule, bar opinion, court report, agency table or platform policy", + "type": [ + "string", + "null" + ] + }, + "sourceKind": { + "description": "primary or secondary", + "type": [ + "string", + "null" + ] + }, + "sourceUrl": { + "type": [ + "string", + "null" + ] + }, + "status": { + "description": "P primary source, S secondary, D default (no specific rule found), U open question", + "type": [ + "string", + "null" + ] + }, + "version": { + "description": "Dataset version", + "type": "string" + } + }, + "required": [ + "publisher", + "dataset", + "version", + "retrievedAt" + ], + "type": "object" +} - changed
Output schema / requiredPrevious value: -[ - "meta" -]New value: +[ + "meta", + "provenance" +]
6 tool updates
- First observed
cite - First observed
list_datasets - First observed
mdl_compare - First observed
mdl_lookup - First observed
mdl_search - First observed
whats_new
Publisher details
- Operator
- Probative Growth · Publisher source
- Operator website
- https://probativegrowth.com
- Vendor relationship
- First-party
- Documentation
- https://probativegrowth.com/resources/rules-api/
- Trust center
- Not available
- Restrictions
- Not applicable
Related MCP Connectors
U.S. law library for AI: court decisions, statutes, court rules and citation checks. Read-only.
Verified lawyer and attorney search, discovery, and matching for AI — 991K+ US profiles.
Verified lawyer and attorney search, discovery, and matching for AI — 991K+ US profiles.
Judged, citation-checked policy corpus over MCP. Keyless public reads; API key for AI tools.
Related MCP Servers
- AlicenseNot gradedqualityDmaintenancePro Se Engine is an MCP server that provides 39 legal research tools across 6 government APIs, enabling AI agents to access case law, SEC filings, federal legislation, regulations, government contracts, and document processing workflows.MIT
- AlicenseAqualityAmaintenanceThe most comprehensive keyless federal-data MCP server. 36 tools for SAM.gov + USAspending + Federal Register + eCFR + Grants.gov. No API key, no registration, no signup. Works in Claude Desktop, Claude Code, Codex CLI, Cursor, Continue, Gemini CLI, and any MCP-aware host.153202 npm13MIT
kanibal-tools-mcpofficial
AlicenseAqualityBmaintenanceLocal, read-only MCP tools for B2B outreach: French telemarketing consent validity (décret 2026-662), GDPR gap report for customer service outsourced outside the EU, cost per kept meeting by lead source, and least-cost capable model selection.4MIT
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.