DavisStirling

Find cases citing a section

find_interpreting_cases

Read-onlyIdempotent

Use this when the user asks which court decisions interpret or apply a Davis-Stirling section. Includes decisions citing its pre-2014 number (former Civil Code §§1350–1378, via the verified AB 805 table), ranked by how central the section is to each opinion, each with the court’s own sentence. Do not use it as a complete citator: it covers only the decisions in this library.

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`limit`	No	Cases to return (default 10).
`section`	Yes	A Davis-Stirling section: "4920", "§ 4920", "Civ. Code § 4920(b)(2)", or an id like "cal.civ.4920".
`min_tier`	No	Lowest tier to include (default "cited").
`include_former`	No	Include citations of the former number (default true).

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`meta`	Yes
`cases`	Yes
`scope`	Yes
`counts`	Yes
`section`	Yes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed3 schema fields changedOct 9, 2026

changedOutput schema / properties / cases / items / properties / method / enum

Previous value: -[
-  "derived",
-  "editorial.human",
-  "editorial.machine-reviewed",
-  "editorial.human-reviewed",
-  "editorial.sourced"
-]New value: +[
+  "derived",
+  "editorial.human",
+  "editorial.machine-drafted",
+  "editorial.machine-reviewed",
+  "editorial.human-reviewed",
+  "editorial.sourced"
+]

changedOutput schema / properties / cases / items / properties / why / anyOf

Previous value: -[
-  {
-    "additionalProperties": false,
-    "properties": {
-      "layer": {
-        "const": "davisstirling",
-        "type": "string"
-      },
-      "method": {
-        "enum": [
-          "derived",
-          "editorial.human",
-          "editorial.machine-reviewed",
-          "editorial.human-reviewed",
-          "editorial.sourced"
-        ],
-        "type": "string"
-      },
-      "value": {
-        "type": "string"
-      }
-    },
-    "required": [
-      "value",
-      "layer",
-      "method"
-    ],
-    "type": "object"
-  },
-  {
-    "type": "null"
-  }
-]New value: +[
+  {
+    "additionalProperties": false,
+    "properties": {
+      "layer": {
+        "const": "davisstirling",
+        "type": "string"
+      },
+      "method": {
+        "enum": [
+          "derived",
+          "editorial.human",
+          "editorial.machine-drafted",
+          "editorial.machine-reviewed",
+          "editorial.human-reviewed",
+          "editorial.sourced"
+        ],
+        "type": "string"
+      },
+      "value": {
+        "type": "string"
+      }
+    },
+    "required": [
+      "value",
+      "layer",
+      "method"
+    ],
+    "type": "object"
+  },
+  {
+    "type": "null"
+  }
+]

changedOutput schema / properties / section / properties / title_layer / anyOf

Previous value: -[
-  {
-    "additionalProperties": false,
-    "properties": {
-      "layer": {
-        "const": "davisstirling",
-        "type": "string"
-      },
-      "method": {
-        "enum": [
-          "derived",
-          "editorial.human",
-          "editorial.machine-reviewed",
-          "editorial.human-reviewed",
-          "editorial.sourced"
-        ],
-        "type": "string"
-      }
-    },
-    "required": [
-      "layer",
-      "method"
-    ],
-    "type": "object"
-  },
-  {
-    "additionalProperties": false,
-    "properties": {
-      "layer": {
-        "const": "source",
-        "type": "string"
-      }
-    },
-    "required": [
-      "layer"
-    ],
-    "type": "object"
-  }
-]New value: +[
+  {
+    "additionalProperties": false,
+    "properties": {
+      "layer": {
+        "const": "davisstirling",
+        "type": "string"
+      },
+      "method": {
+        "enum": [
+          "derived",
+          "editorial.human",
+          "editorial.machine-drafted",
+          "editorial.machine-reviewed",
+          "editorial.human-reviewed",
+          "editorial.sourced"
+        ],
+        "type": "string"
+      }
+    },
+    "required": [
+      "layer",
+      "method"
+    ],
+    "type": "object"
+  },
+  {
+    "additionalProperties": false,
+    "properties": {
+      "layer": {
+        "const": "source",
+        "type": "string"
+      }
+    },
+    "required": [
+      "layer"
+    ],
+    "type": "object"
+  }
+]

Changed4 schema fields changedOct 9, 2026
- addedInput schema / properties / section / anyOf
```
Added value: +[
+  {
+    "maxLength": 100,
+    "minLength": 1,
+    "type": "string"
+  },
+  {
+    "exclusiveMinimum": 0,
+    "type": "number"
+  }
+]
```
- removedInput schema / properties / section / maxLength
```
Removed value: -100
```
- removedInput schema / properties / section / minLength
```
Removed value: -1
```
- removedInput schema / properties / section / type
```
Removed value: -"string"
```
First observedOct 8, 2026

TDQS

A4.9/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

Annotations already cover the safety profile (readOnly, idempotent, closed-world), so the description adds value beyond them: it discloses that results include pre-2014 former numbers via the AB 805 table, that they are ranked by centrality, and that each carries the court's own sentence. The library-coverage limitation is a genuinely useful behavioral caveat.

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 sentences, front-loaded with the usage trigger before secondary detail about coverage and ranking. No filler; every clause carries information the agent needs.

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?

With an output schema present, the description need not explain return shape, and it covers the remaining essentials: trigger, former-number inclusion, ranking, and coverage limits. Nothing needed for correct invocation or interpretation is missing.

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 still adds meaning by explaining that former-number citations are included (directly illuminating the include_former parameter) and that results are centrality-ranked, which contextualizes min_tier. It does not document the section format or limit syntax, keeping it just above baseline.

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 and resource ('which court decisions interpret or apply a Davis-Stirling section'), which is clearly distinct from siblings like get_statute_section (returns the statute) and get_court_case (returns one case). The 'citator' framing sharpens the resource type without ambiguity.

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?

Opens with an explicit trigger ('Use this when the user asks which court decisions interpret or apply a section') and adds a when-not boundary ('Do not use it as a complete citator: it covers only the decisions in this library'). Both the selecting condition and the scope exclusion are stated directly.

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

All DavisStirling 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?