Skip to main content
Glama

Semantic Search Cases

semantic_search_cases

Search Indian court cases using natural language questions about legal concepts, fact patterns, or doctrines, even without exact keyword matches.

Instructions

AI vector search over the roughly 2M case subset that has embeddings, out of the full 310M plus corpus. CONSUMES AI CREDITS. Prefer this over search_indian_court_cases for natural language questions about legal concepts, fact patterns or doctrines, where exact keywords will not match. Slower, a single call can take a minute or more. Real behaviour note: this endpoint's validation layer also accepts top level court, year, caseType, caseNumber, judgeName, judges, judge, fromDate and toDate fields, but the handler silently ignores all of them, only query, page, limit and filters are actually used, so this tool only exposes those. Put any filtering inside the filters object instead. Another quirk: if the cleaned query text ends up shorter than 3 characters after internal processing, the service falls back to a plain keyword search and marks the response with meta.fallbackMode = "opensearch".

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
pageNoPage number, default 1.
limitNoResults per page, 1 to 100, default 20, clamped to 100 server side.
queryYesNatural language question or description, minimum 3 characters.
filtersNoFree form filter object passed straight through to the vector store. Keys the handler actually understands downstream: court, caseType, caseYear, judgeName, caseNumber, and decisionDate as an object with $gte and or $lte sub keys for range filtering. Filters supplied here override whatever filters the service would otherwise auto extract from the query text.
Behavior5/5

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden and does so thoroughly. It discloses AI credit consumption, performance characteristics, silent ignoring of certain fields, and the fallback behavior to keyword search with a response marker. This is exemplary transparency.

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?

Although lengthy, the description is front-loaded with the core purpose and every sentence contributes unique information: cost, speed, use case, ignored fields, and fallback behavior. No fluff or repetition; the structure guides the reader from main purpose to important caveats.

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?

Given the tool's complexity (no output schema), the description covers essential operational details: the subset size, credit consumption, latency, ignored parameters, and the fallback mode field in the response. This is sufficient for an agent to set expectations and invoke correctly.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters5/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema coverage is 100%, but the description adds substantial context beyond the schema: it warns that certain top-level fields are 'silently ignored' and directs users to put filtering in the 'filters' object. It also clarifies that filters override auto-extracted ones, adding meaning not present in 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 clearly identifies the tool as 'AI vector search' over a specific subset of cases, and explicitly contrasts it with a sibling tool: 'Prefer this over search_indian_court_cases for natural language questions...' This provides a specific verb, resource, and scope, fully distinguishing it from alternatives.

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?

Provides explicit when-to-use guidance: 'Prefer this over search_indian_court_cases for natural language questions about legal concepts, fact patterns or doctrines, where exact keywords will not match.' Also warns about slowness ('a single call can take a minute or more'), setting expectations for appropriate usage.

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

Install Server

Other Tools

Latest Blog Posts

MCP directory API

We provide all the information about MCP servers via our MCP API.

curl -X GET 'https://glama.ai/api/mcp/v1/servers/thinkscoop-technologies/courtmesh-mcp'

If you have feedback or need assistance with the MCP directory API, please join our Discord server