Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
CourtAPI MCP Server

CourtAPI MCP Server

Official
by courtio
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Remote

get_case

Retrieve all metadata for a known court case—title, judge, dates, assets, liabilities—and see available sub-resources with timestamps. Call this first after locating a case.

Instructions

Get all metadata for a known case: title, chapter, judge, key dates (filed/closed/discharged), assets, liabilities, and links to sub-resources (dockets, claims, parties, etc.) with their last-modified timestamps. Always call this first after finding a case. The response includes a 'menu' object where each entry has a 'modified' timestamp (null = never purchased) showing what sub-resources are available. Free unless include_live_pacer=true.

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": {
      "court_code": "<court_code>",
      "case_number": "<case_number>"
    },
    "name": "get_case"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
court_codeYesCourt code, e.g. 'nysbke' (NY Southern Bankruptcy), 'debke' (Delaware Bankruptcy), 'ilnbke' (IL Northern Bankruptcy). Use list_courts to find the right code.
case_numberYesLong-form case number, e.g. '1:14-bk-10557'. Always use the long form — PACER short forms like '14-10557' will not match. Use find_cases if unsure.
include_live_pacerNotrue = fetch fresh data from PACER (costs PACER credits). Default false = free cached.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.1.1

TDQS

A4.2/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the transparency burden. It discloses that the response includes a 'menu' object with 'modified' timestamps (null = never purchased), and explains cost behavior ('Free unless include_live_pacer=true'). It could add details about authentication or edge cases, but the core behavioral traits are covered.

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?

The description is three sentences, starts with the core purpose, and packs relevant details (metadata fields, menu timestamps, cost) without redundancy or fluff. Every sentence earns its place.

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?

There is no output schema, so the description must explain return values—it does, by listing metadata categories and the menu object with timestamp semantics. It also provides workflow context ('Always call this first'). It could mention error behavior or the full list of sub-resources, but for a read-only metadata hub, it is sufficiently complete.

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 description coverage is 100%, with each parameter well-documented (court_code examples, long-form case_number, PACER cost note). The description does not offer unique parameter meaning beyond the schema; the cost note duplicates the schema's include_live_pacer description. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 clearly states 'Get all metadata for a known case' and enumerates specific contents (title, chapter, judge, dates, assets, liabilities) and sub-resource links. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like get_dockets and get_claims by positioning itself as the umbrella resource-fetching tool.

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?

The instruction 'Always call this first after finding a case' provides explicit when-to-use guidance. It implies the tool precedes sub-resource fetches, but it does not explicitly name alternatives or exclusion criteria like 'for dockets use get_dockets instead,' so it falls just 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.

Deploy Server

Other Tools