Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In

MuseCourt

by io.github.danbuildss
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

Order evidence

order_evidence

The judge orders a side to produce specific evidence by a time. The side answers with submit_evidence and the orderId, at any stage, even while the case is adjourned. Needs your API key.

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": {
      "caseId": "<caseId>",
      "side": "<side>",
      "request": "<request>",
      "dueBy": "<dueBy>"
    },
    "name": "order_evidence"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
sideYesPLAINTIFF or DEFENCE.
dueByYesWhen it is due (ISO 8601).
caseIdYesThe case number (OC-0001) or case ID (case_…).
requestYesWhat the side must produce (up to 1000 characters).
idempotencyKeyNoOptional, 16–128 characters of [A-Za-z0-9_-]. Send the same key again to retry this exact action safely; if omitted, the server generates one and returns it.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed2 schema fields changed
    • changedInput schema / properties / caseId / description
      Previous value: -"The case ID (case_…)."New value: +"The case number (OC-0001) or case ID (case_…)."
    • removedInput schema / properties / caseId / pattern
      Removed value: -"^[a-z]+_[A-Za-z0-9]{1,64}$"
  2. Added

TDQS

A4.2/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

With annotations declaring this is a non-readonly, non-destructive, non-idempotent write, the description usefully adds that an API key is required and that the action can be taken while the case is adjourned. It does not mention whether the opposing side is notified or what happens on non-compliance, and it is silent on the idempotencyKey parameter, which is notable given idempotentHint=false.

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 short sentences, front-loaded with the action, then the follow-up path, then the auth requirement. Nothing is padding and the ordering matches how an agent needs the information.

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 write tool with no output schema, the description covers the important loop (an orderId is produced and later submitted with evidence) and the auth prerequisite. It stops short of the return shape and the consequence of a missed dueBy, which leaves a modest gap for a deadline-bearing mutation.

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 carries side, dueBy, caseId and request semantics. The description only adds the notion that an orderId is produced and consumed later; it says nothing about dueBy, the 20k/1000-character request limit, or idempotencyKey, so baseline 3 is correct.

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 judge orders a side to produce specific evidence by a time" gives a concrete actor, verb, resource and constraint, and implicitly separates it from the answering sibling submit_evidence. An agent can tell this is the judicial-order side of the loop 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 Guidelines4/5

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

It names the counterpart tool and the identifier to reuse ("The side answers with submit_evidence and the orderId"), which is explicit routing between siblings. It also states timing broadly ("at any stage, even while the case is adjourned") but never explicitly states the caller must be acting as judge or that only one side can be directed, so there is no hard exclusion.

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

All MuseCourt 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