Hudoc

Echr Search

echr_search

Read-onlyIdempotent

Search European Court of Human Rights (ECHR / Strasbourg) case law by free text, Convention Article, respondent state and/or date. Returns case name, application number(s), Article(s) engaged, the conclusion (violation/no violation), importance level and the itemid to read the full judgment with echr_judgment. Use for "what has Strasbourg ruled on Article 8 against France", "recent Article 10 freedom-of-expression judgments", etc. Covers judgments by default; pass collection to search decisions, advisory opinions, resolutions, communicated cases or reports instead.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`limit`	No	Max results, default 10, max 25.
`query`	No	Free-text words to match anywhere in the case (case name, conclusion text, keywords), e.g. "surveillance", "freedom of expression". Optional if article/respondent narrow enough on their own.
`article`	No	Convention Article number, e.g. "8" (private/family life), "10" (freedom of expression), "6" (fair trial). Matches the Article and its sub-paragraphs.
`date_to`	No	ISO date (YYYY-MM-DD). Only documents on or before this date.
`date_from`	No	ISO date (YYYY-MM-DD). Only documents on or after this date.
`collection`	No	Document type to search (default "judgments"). "decisions" = admissibility decisions; "communicated_cases" = pending cases the Court has notified the government of, no ruling yet.
`importance`	No	HUDOC importance level: 1 = highest (leading cases), 4 = lowest. Omit for all.
`respondent`	No	Respondent state — ISO3 code (e.g. "FRA", "GBR") or common name (e.g. "France", "United Kingdom"). One of the 46 Council of Europe states, or Russia for pre-2022 cases.

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`note`	No	Present ONLY when results is empty: how to broaden the query. Its presence means zero matches, not an error.
`count`	Yes	Number of results returned in this response.
`query`	Yes	Echo of the resolved filters actually sent to HUDOC, after country-name and date normalisation.
`source`	Yes	Attribution string for the HUDOC database.
`results`	Yes	Matching documents, most recent first.
`total_matches`	Yes	Total documents in HUDOC matching the query, which is usually far larger than count — page with limit.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedSep 22, 2026

TDQS

A4.5/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already cover readOnly, openWorld, idempotent, and non-destructive behavior, so the bar is lower. The description adds valuable context beyond those annotations: the default collection, the returned fields, and the connection to echr_judgment via itemid. No contradiction exists.

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 dense but efficient: three sentences cover purpose, return values, example queries, default collection, and alternative collections. Information is front-loaded and every sentence earns its place; there is no filler or repetition.

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 complex 8-parameter search tool, the description is complete in context: the schema covers every parameter, annotations cover safety and idempotency, and an output schema exists. The description adds the remaining key behavioral context — the default collection and the follow-up path to echr_judgment.

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%, and the schema already provides detailed per-parameter explanations, including enums, ISO date formats, and examples. The tool description adds high-level search intent and default collection behavior, but it does not materially improve on the parameter semantics already available in the schema.

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 opens with a specific verb and resource: 'Search European Court of Human Rights (ECHR / Strasbourg) case law', and it lists the exact filtering dimensions (free text, Article, respondent state, date). It also distinguishes itself from the sibling echr_judgment by stating that the returned itemid is used to read the full judgment with that tool.

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 provides explicit example queries, such as 'what has Strasbourg ruled on Article 8 against France', making the intended use immediately clear. It also states the default collection (judgments) and instructs when to pass 'collection' to search decisions, advisory opinions, resolutions, communicated cases, or reports instead.

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

All Hudoc 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.