insc.one — INSC.1 Citation Layer

check_cross_citations

Check any set of citations against the complete insc.one Supreme Court cross-citation index (1950–2026). Accepts INSC, SCR, SCC, AIR, MANU, or mixed forms (compact like 2026INSC668 or bracketed like [1950] 1 S.C.R. 88). Each row returns RESOLVED with its Universal Citation Rosetta (all parallel report forms), decision date, gate status, and the official e-SCR source; or NOT FOUND — fail-closed, with no silent fallback to unrelated cases. Optional year filter flags year mismatches. Up to 50 citations per call.

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": {
      "citations": "<citations>"
    },
    "name": "check_cross_citations"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`year`	No	Optional 4-digit year the citations must come from (flags YEAR_MISMATCH rows).
`citations`	Yes	Citations to verify, one string each, e.g. ["2026 INSC 668", "(1973) 4 SCC 225", "AIR 1950 SC 27"]. Max 50.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

AddedNov 9, 2026

TDQS

A3.8/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden and does well: it discloses fail-closed behavior with no silent fallback, the per-row RESOLVED/NOT FOUND outcomes, the returned fields (Rosetta forms, decision date, gate status, e-SCR source), and a 50-citation cap. It omits auth requirements and latency/rate behavior, keeping it short of a 5.

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?

Front-loaded with the core action and scope, then input formats, then return shape, then limits. Dense but every sentence carries information; the parenthetical format examples are slightly verbose but justified.

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?

No output schema exists, and the description compensates by describing both success and failure row shapes and the fields returned. For a two-parameter batch tool this is nearly complete, with only auth and performance characteristics left unstated.

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 coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3; the description adds real value by enumerating accepted citation syntaxes (INSC, SCR, SCC, AIR, MANU, compact like 2026INSC668 or bracketed like [1950] 1 S.C.R. 88) and clarifying that the year filter flags YEAR_MISMATCH rows rather than filtering them out.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('Check any set of citations against the complete insc.one Supreme Court cross-citation index') with scope (1950–2026) and accepted input forms. It does not explicitly distinguish itself from the sibling resolve_citation or format_citation, so an agent must infer the boundary, but the batch-verification framing is clear.

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

Usage Guidelines3/5

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

Implies usage through 'Check any set of citations' and the 50-per-call batch limit, and the year filter's purpose is stated. However, there is no explicit when-to-use-this-vs-resolve_citation guidance or statement of prerequisites, leaving the sibling routing to inference.

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

All insc.one — INSC.1 Citation Layer 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?