Workers' Rights

Search employment-law rulings

search_rulings

Read-only

Search published employment-law rulings from our research corpus by keyword, law, court, federal circuit, state, outcome, and date. Returns published opinions with citations, outcomes, procedural stage, employers, claim types, recorded monetary amounts, and links to the full opinion. Use this to ground any claim about how employment cases have been decided. Results are quality-filtered (low-confidence and junk rows excluded).

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`law`	No	Filter by a stored law association (not a verified holding), e.g. "title-vii", "adea", "ada", "fmla", "flsa".
`court`	No	Filter by CourtListener court id, e.g. "scotus", "ca11" (11th Circuit).
`limit`	No	Max rulings to return (1–25).
`query`	No	Lexical search across case name, opinion excerpt, stored summary and employer. Every word must match; a match does not verify a claim or holding.
`state`	No	Two-letter US state code the case was filed in, e.g. "FL", "CA".
`circuit`	No	Filter to a federal appeals circuit (the appeals court plus its district courts). Preferred values: first-circuit, second-circuit, third-circuit, fourth-circuit, fifth-circuit, sixth-circuit, seventh-circuit, eighth-circuit, ninth-circuit, tenth-circuit, eleventh-circuit, dc-circuit, federal-circuit. Display forms like "Eleventh Circuit" or "11th" are also accepted.
`date_to`	No	Latest filing date (YYYY-MM-DD).
`outcome`	No	Filter to a specific case outcome.
`date_from`	No	Earliest filing date (YYYY-MM-DD).

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed2 schema fields changedOct 22, 2026

changedInput schema / properties / law / description

Previous value: -"Filter by a related law id, e.g. \"title-vii\", \"adea\", \"ada\", \"fmla\", \"flsa\"."New value: +"Filter by a stored law association (not a verified holding), e.g. \"title-vii\", \"adea\", \"ada\", \"fmla\", \"flsa\"."

changedInput schema / properties / query / description

Previous value: -"Free-text search across case name and opinion snippet (e.g. \"pregnancy discrimination retaliation\")."New value: +"Lexical search across case name, opinion excerpt, stored summary and employer. Every word must match; a match does not verify a claim or holding."

Changed1 schema field changedSep 4, 2026
- addedInput schema / additionalProperties
```
Added value: +false
```
Changed2 schema fields changedJul 15, 2026
- removedInput schema / additionalProperties
```
Removed value: -false
```
- removedInput schema / required
```
Removed value: -[
-  "limit"
-]
```

Changed1 schema field changedJul 7, 2026

addedInput schema / properties / circuit

Added value: +{
+  "description": "Filter to a federal appeals circuit (the appeals court plus its district courts). Preferred values: first-circuit, second-circuit, third-circuit, fourth-circuit, fifth-circuit, sixth-circuit, seventh-circuit, eighth-circuit, ninth-circuit, tenth-circuit, eleventh-circuit, dc-circuit, federal-circuit. Display forms like \"Eleventh Circuit\" or \"11th\" are also accepted.",
+  "maxLength": 40,
+  "type": "string"
+}

First observedJun 9, 2026

TDQS

A4.2/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already cover the safety profile (readOnly, non-destructive, open-world), and the description adds real context beyond them: results come from "our research corpus" and are quality-filtered so low-confidence and junk rows are excluded. It does not state result ordering/pagination behavior beyond the schema's limit cap, but the filtering guarantee is meaningful behavioral disclosure.

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?

Three sentences with zero waste: what it filters on, what comes back, and how to use it. The filter dimensions are front-loaded and the quality-filter note is placed last where it belongs.

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 no output schema, the description carries the burden of explaining return values and does so (citations, outcomes, procedural stage, employers, claim types, monetary amounts, opinion links). Minor gaps remain on default result ordering and behavior when all nine optional filters are omitted, but nothing an agent needs to call it correctly is missing.

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 100%, including enum values, date patterns, circuit display forms, and the caveat that law associations are not verified holdings. The description only restates the filter categories already documented in the schema, so the baseline 3 applies.

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

Purpose5/5

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

States a specific verb (search) and resource (published employment-law rulings) and enumerates the exact filter dimensions: keyword, law, court, circuit, state, outcome, date. It also describes the returned fields, which lets an agent distinguish it from find_similar_cases and get_corpus_stats without opening any schema.

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?

"Use this to ground any claim about how employment cases have been decided" gives a clear use context, and the described filters imply the intended retrieval scenarios. No sibling is named as an alternative and no when-not-to-use condition is given, so it stops short of a 5.

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

All Workers' Rights tools Inspect

Try in Browser

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

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

Resources

Need Help?