DavisStirling

Check a citation

resolve_citation

Read-onlyIdempotent

Use this when you need to check a California HOA citation before relying on it: a Davis-Stirling section (current, or a former pre-2014 number like "Civ. Code 1363"), or a case by reporter citation or name. Returns the current authority and, for former numbers, where the provision lives now per the AB 805 recodification table. Do not use it for citations to other states or other California codes.

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`citation`	Yes	The citation as written, e.g. "Civ. Code § 1365.5" or "8 Cal.4th 361".

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`meta`	Yes
`input`	Yes
`matches`	Yes
`suggestions`	Yes
`not_found_reason`	Yes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed4 schema fields changedOct 9, 2026
- addedInput schema / properties / citation / anyOf
```
Added value: +[
+  {
+    "maxLength": 200,
+    "minLength": 1,
+    "type": "string"
+  },
+  {
+    "exclusiveMinimum": 0,
+    "type": "number"
+  }
+]
```
- removedInput schema / properties / citation / maxLength
```
Removed value: -200
```
- removedInput schema / properties / citation / minLength
```
Removed value: -1
```
- removedInput schema / properties / citation / type
```
Removed value: -"string"
```
First observedOct 8, 2026

TDQS

A4.6/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnly, idempotent, non-destructive, closed-world behavior, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds genuinely new context: it returns the current authority and, for former numbers, where the provision now lives per the AB 805 recodification table. It stops short of describing latency or error/not-found behavior, keeping it just under top marks.

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 with no filler; the usage trigger, accepted inputs, return behavior, and exclusion are all front-loaded. The first sentence is dense with clauses, but every clause carries distinct information, so the density is justified rather than wasteful.

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 a single fully documented parameter, rich annotations, and an output schema covering return values, the description only needed to cover scope, input varieties, and exclusions — and it does all three. Nothing an agent needs to invoke it correctly 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, and the description earns above that by enumerating accepted input shapes beyond the schema's examples: former pre-2014 numbers like 'Civ. Code 1363' and cases identified by reporter citation or name. That materially expands what an agent knows it can pass.

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 (check/resolve) and resource (California HOA citation) with precise scope: Davis-Stirling sections, former pre-2014 numbers, and cases by reporter citation or name. It clearly distinguishes itself from siblings like get_statute_section, get_court_case, and find_interpreting_cases by virtue of being a citation-resolution 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?

Gives an explicit trigger ('when you need to check a California HOA citation before relying on it') and an explicit exclusion ('Do not use it for citations to other states or other California codes'). This is exactly the when/when-not pattern that routes an agent correctly without opening a schema.

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?