Skip to main content
Glama

GLO Law

Citation-graph neighbors

citations
Read-onlyIdempotent

Given one opinion id, lists the cases it cites (direction=authorities) or the cases that cite it (direction=cited_by). Textual reference only: an edge means one opinion’s text names the other; it is not treatment, agreement, validity or "good law", and not a Shepard’s or KeyCite result. At most 1000 references are examined; those resolving to a loaded case are shown (most-cited first), the rest are counted in out_of_corpus_count, and examined_capped=true marks a floor. depth is how often the citing text names the case, not importance. References are per opinion: same_case_opinions gives each opinion of a record its own count and most_references_on names one carrying more (Miranda v. Arizona: record 107252’s combined text 49; lead opinion 9423233, 57,482). also_carried_by names other records sharing the reporter citation, each with its own count; counts are never pooled. The reference table misses citations in the stored text: 22.7% of references on a preregistered sample had no edge (95% interval 18.9-27.0%, n=405), concentrated in some cases, so a thin cited_by list is not evidence a case is rarely cited. with_passages=true (cited_by only) adds citing_passage, the citing court’s own sentence copied verbatim, found only where the citing opinion repeats the reporter citation (first occurrence; at most 10 opinions a request), with passage_note and passage_error. Case law in this mirror ends 2026-09-30 (exact scan of all 10,174,547 case records): a thin or empty result for recent authority means the collection ends there, not that no such case exists. Every response carries a "note" and a coverage_note. The sources tool returns this tool’s full coverage statement.

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
idYesseed OPINION id (from a search/fts/semantic/similar result opinion_id)
limitNomax in-corpus results, 1-50 (default 25)
directionNoauthorities = cases THIS opinion cites; cited_by = cases that cite THIS one (default cited_by)
with_passagesNocited_by only: also return each citing court's verbatim sentence around the citation (citing_passage). Adds passage_note, passages_scanned, passages_found, and passage_error when the pass fails or the direction does not support it

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observed

TDQS

A4.8/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Beyond the annotations, the description discloses the 1000-reference examination cap, out_of_corpus_count, examined_capped as a floor marker, the 22.7% missing-edge rate, per-opinion count behavior, and the 10-opinion limit on passages. These are substantial behavioral details that materially affect interpretation of results.

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?

The purpose and direction semantics are front-loaded, and the density is justified by the tool's interpretive caveats. However, the description is a single dense block and includes some highly specific examples and statistics that make it harder to scan than it could be.

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?

There is no output schema, so the description must explain return semantics; it does so thoroughly with counts, coverage notes, passage fields, per-opinion behavior, and corpus-ending caveats. An agent has enough context to call and interpret this tool correctly.

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 already 100%, so the schema carries the basic parameter meanings. The description adds useful semantics for with_passages, including the cited_by-only restriction, verbatim sentence behavior, and the at-most-10-opinions limit, but it does not deepen every parameter beyond 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 states a specific verb and resource: given one opinion id, it lists cases cited by that opinion or cases citing it, selected via direction. It also sharply distinguishes the tool from treatment/validity tools by saying the edge is textual reference only, not treatment or 'good law'.

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 explicitly explains the two direction modes and when each applies, warns that a thin cited_by list is not evidence of low citation, and clarifies the date cutoff for recent authority. It also points to sources for the full coverage statement and distinguishes this graph from Shepard's/KeyCite-style treatment.

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

Try in Browser

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

Resources