SiteCheck Company Records

Lawyers and law firms listed in the FindLaw directory

gov_findlaw

Read-only

Lawyers and law firms listed in the FindLaw directory for a practice area in a US city: name, firm or attorney, phone, street address, website, rating and review count, firm of an attorney, profile link. Reads the structured data on FindLaw's public city page (first page only, ~20-40 of totalListed, in FindLaw order incl. sponsored placement). A directory listing is not proof of a bar licence; check the state bar. Related tools on this server, for a different need: gov_governmentbids when you need open US/Canadian government bid solicitations listed; gov_clinicaltrials when you need ClinicalTrials.gov studies matching a condition, drug. Price: $0.002 in USDC per successful call, paid with x402 (Base, Solana or Arc); failed calls are not charged.

Tool call template

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

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "practiceArea": "<practiceArea>",
      "state": "<state>",
      "city": "<city>"
    },
    "name": "gov_findlaw"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`city`	Yes	City, e.g. houston, los-angeles
`state`	Yes	US state name, e.g. texas, new-york
`practiceArea`	Yes	FindLaw practice slug, e.g. bankruptcy-law, family-law, criminal-law, personal-injury-plaintiff, immigration-law, estate-planning

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedOct 23, 2026

TDQS

A4.6/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

Beyond readOnlyHint and openWorldHint, the description discloses key limits: first page only, roughly 20-40 of totalListed, FindLaw ordering including sponsored placement, and that failed calls are not charged. These are material behavioral details an agent could not infer from annotations alone.

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 resource and scope are front-loaded, and most sentences carry useful information. The description is dense but well organized; the field list and pricing/alternative details are relevant, though slightly packed into one paragraph.

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?

For a read-only directory lookup with an output schema, the description is complete: it covers scope, result limits, ordering caveats, licensing caveat, pricing, and sibling alternatives. An agent has enough information to invoke it 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 description coverage is 100%, so the schema already explains all three parameters, including city and state examples. The description reinforces that the query is by practice area and US city but adds little parameter-level detail beyond what the schema provides.

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?

The description states a specific resource and scope: FindLaw directory listings for lawyers and law firms in a practice area and US city, with the returned fields enumerated. It also names sibling tools for different needs, so an agent can distinguish it without opening the schema.

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 explicitly routes agents to alternatives: gov_governmentbids for bid solicitations and gov_clinicaltrials for condition/drug studies. It also frames the intended use as directory lookup and warns that a listing is not proof of a bar licence, so users should check the state bar.

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

All SiteCheck Company Records 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?