Skip to main content
Glama

justicelibre

by io.github.Dahliyaal
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

get_decision

Read-onlyIdempotent

Full text of a decision, by id or by numero (+ court). Several decisions with that number: list decisions (ECHR/CJEU: the one judgment is served, the rest in autres_documents). An administrative number alone ("2200433") is refused; CE: see homonymes. Also reads doctrine (cada:…, ddd:…), JORFTEXT and KALIARTI ids.

Examples: get_decision(id="CETATEXT000007641393") get_decision(numero="497566", court="CE") get_decision(numero="23/05688", court_name="CA Douai") # RG get_decision(numero="24-14.641") # Cour de cassation appeal; likewise 2024L02643 (commercial court), 6538/74 (ECHR), C-72/24 (CJEU)

Args: id: id from a search (JURITEXT, CETATEXT, 001-…, CELEX, JORFTEXT…) or a judicial/European case number numero: case, appeal (pourvoi), RG, commercial court, ECHR or CJEU number court: CE | CAA | TA | CONSTIT | CASS | CA | TJ | TCOM | CPH | CEDH | CJUE | CNDA court_name: "TA Lyon", "CA Douai" nature: DC, QPC… (CONSTIT, shared number)

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
idNoid from a search (JURITEXT, CETATEXT, 001-…, CELEX, JORFTEXT…) or a judicial/European case number
courtNoCE | CAA | TA | CONSTIT | CASS | CA | TJ | TCOM | CPH | CEDH | CJUE | CNDA
natureNoDC, QPC… (CONSTIT, shared number)
numeroNocase, appeal (pourvoi), RG, commercial court, ECHR or CJEU number
offsetNolong document (over 100,000 characters, served in pages): value of `pagination.suite`
court_nameNo"TA Lyon", "CA Douai"

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changed
    • changedInput schema / properties / court / description
      Previous value: -"CE | CAA | TA | CONSTIT | CASS | CA | TJ | TCOM | CPH | CEDH | CJUE"New value: +"CE | CAA | TA | CONSTIT | CASS | CA | TJ | TCOM | CPH | CEDH | CJUE | CNDA"
  2. Changed6 schema fields changed
    • changedInput schema / properties / court / description
      Previous value: -"CE | CAA | TA | CONSTIT | CASS | CA | TJ | TCOM | CEDH | CJUE"New value: +"CE | CAA | TA | CONSTIT | CASS | CA | TJ | TCOM | CPH | CEDH | CJUE"
    • changedInput schema / properties / court_name / description
      Previous value: -"« TA Lyon », « CA Douai »"New value: +"\"TA Lyon\", \"CA Douai\""
    • changedInput schema / properties / id / description
      Previous value: -"id d'une recherche (JURITEXT, CETATEXT, 001-…, CELEX…) ou numéro judiciaire/européen"New value: +"id from a search (JURITEXT, CETATEXT, 001-…, CELEX, JORFTEXT…) or a judicial/European case number"
    • changedInput schema / properties / nature / description
      Previous value: -"DC, QPC… (CONSTIT)"New value: +"DC, QPC… (CONSTIT, shared number)"
    • changedInput schema / properties / numero / description
      Previous value: -"n° de requête, pourvoi, RG, requête CEDH, affaire CJUE"New value: +"case, appeal (pourvoi), RG, commercial court, ECHR or CJEU number"
    • addedInput schema / properties / offset
      Added value: +{
+  "default": 0,
+  "description": "long document (over 100,000 characters, served in pages): value of `pagination.suite`",
+  "title": "Offset",
+  "type": "integer"
+}
  3. Changed5 schema fields changed
    • changedInput schema / properties / court / description
      Previous value: -"CE | CAA | TA | CONSTIT"New value: +"CE | CAA | TA | CONSTIT | CASS | CA | TJ | TCOM | CEDH | CJUE"
    • changedInput schema / properties / court_name / description
      Previous value: -"« TA Lyon », « CAA Douai »"New value: +"« TA Lyon », « CA Douai »"
    • changedInput schema / properties / id / description
      Previous value: -"JURITEXT, CONSTEXT, id Judilibre, CETATEXT, DCE_/DTA_/DCAA_, /Ariane_Web/…, 001-… (CEDH), CELEX (CJUE), cada:… (doctrine)"New value: +"id d'une recherche (JURITEXT, CETATEXT, 001-…, CELEX…) ou numéro judiciaire/européen"
    • changedInput schema / properties / nature / description
      Previous value: -"DC, QPC… (CONSTIT, numéro partagé)"New value: +"DC, QPC… (CONSTIT)"
    • changedInput schema / properties / numero / description
      Previous value: -"n° de requête ou de décision (avec court)"New value: +"n° de requête, pourvoi, RG, requête CEDH, affaire CJUE"
  4. Changed1 schema field changed
    • removedInput schema / properties / session_token
      Removed value: -{
-  "default": "",
-  "description": "jeton PISTE (facultatif)",
-  "title": "Session Token",
-  "type": "string"
-}
  5. Added

TDQS

A4.3/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds genuine behavior beyond that: how duplicate case numbers are served (one judgment, rest in autres_documents), that administrative numbers are refused, the homonymes fallback for CE, and pagination via offset. It does not contradict any annotation.

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 purpose and lookup keys are front-loaded, followed by edge cases and then a compact example block. It is longer than average but the examples map directly to parameter combinations an agent must choose between, so they earn their space. Minor redundancy between the examples and the Args section keeps it from a 5.

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

Completeness5/5

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 description instead covers everything else an agent needs: accepted id schemes, all lookup modes, edge-case handling for duplicates and rejected inputs, and the offset/pagination path for long documents. Nothing material is missing.

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 description coverage is 100%, so baseline is 3. The description goes beyond the schema by giving format examples per parameter (CETATEXT000007641393, 497566, 23/05688, 24-14.641, C-72/24) and clarifying that id may itself be a case number, which the schema does not spell out. That is real added meaning over the field descriptions.

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 opening line states a specific verb and resource ('Full text of a decision') and immediately names the two lookup keys (id or numero+court). It is easy to tell apart from the search_* siblings because it returns full text of a single known decision rather than listing. It stops short of 5 only because it never names an alternative tool explicitly.

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

Usage Guidelines5/5

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

It specifies exactly when each input form applies (id from a search, numero+court, court_name for RG, bare numero for Cass/ECHR/CJEU) and gives worked examples for every mode. It also handles the negative cases: a bare administrative number is 'refused', duplicate numbers route to autres_documents or homonymes, and it discloses doctrine/JORFTEXT/KALIARTI id support. Conditions are concrete rather than implied.

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

All justicelibre toolsInspect
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