CaseMagic — Federal Court Case Lookup & Monitor

Load the Case Passport

get_case_passport

Read-onlyIdempotent

Retrieve the user's persistent CaseMagic record for a saved matter: case identity, parties, docket activity, correspondence and available documents, so that you can work with the facts of their case. Use this when the user asks you to load, open or catch up on their case, or when you need the facts of their matter before answering anything else about it.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`matter_id`	No	The CaseMagic matter id, as returned by create_case_passport or shown in an earlier result. Omit it when the account follows exactly one case and that is the one meant.

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`error`	No	Present only when the call failed: a code, a message and, where there is one, an action such as a link to give the user.
`version`	No	Passport version.
`passport`	No	The persistent record of the case.
`matter_id`	No	The case.
`updated_at`	No	When the Passport last changed.
`passport_id`	No	Case Passport id.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed1 schema field changedOct 5, 2026

changedOutput schema / (root)

Previous value: -nullNew value: +{
+  "additionalProperties": true,
+  "properties": {
+    "error": {
+      "additionalProperties": true,
+      "description": "Present only when the call failed: a code, a message and, where there is one, an action such as a link to give the user.",
+      "properties": {
+        "code": {
+          "description": "Machine-readable error code, for example CASE_NOT_FOUND or MULTIPLE_CASES_FOUND.",
+          "type": "string"
+        },
+        "message": {
+          "description": "What went wrong, in a sentence.",
+          "type": "string"
+        }
+      },
+      "type": "object"
+    },
+    "matter_id": {
+      "description": "The case.",
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "passport": {
+      "additionalProperties": true,
+      "description": "The persistent record of the case.",
+      "properties": {},
+      "type": "object"
+    },
+    "passport_id": {
+      "description": "Case Passport id.",
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "updated_at": {
+      "description": "When the Passport last changed.",
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "version": {
+      "description": "Passport version.",
+      "type": "number"
+    }
+  },
+  "type": "object"
+}

First observedSep 24, 2026

TDQS

A3.9/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare this a safe, idempotent, read-only, non-open-world operation, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds that the record is persistent and scoped to a saved matter, but says nothing about permissions, freshness, or rate limits beyond that. Adequate but not enriching.

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?

Two sentences, front-loaded with what is retrieved and followed by when to use it. Every clause carries information, though the payload enumeration is slightly list-heavy for a single-parameter tool.

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?

An output schema exists, so return values need not be documented, and the description still sketches the payload well enough for routing. For a single optional-parameter read tool with full annotations, the agent has what it needs; only permissions/freshness context is absent.

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 coverage is 100% and the schema already explains matter_id, including the fallback when it is omitted. The description never mentions the parameter, so it adds no meaning beyond the structured field. 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 (retrieve) and resource (the user's persistent CaseMagic record for a saved matter), then enumerates the payload: case identity, parties, docket activity, correspondence and documents. This aggregate framing clearly distinguishes it from narrower siblings such as get_case_docket, get_case_documents or get_case_mail.

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?

Gives explicit triggering conditions ('when the user asks you to load, open or catch up on their case') plus a routing rule ('when you need the facts of their matter before answering anything else about it'). It does not name an alternative sibling or state when not to use it, 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 CaseMagic — Federal Court Case Lookup & Monitor 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?