Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
Fontes

Fontes

by ykarapazar
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Local

get_decision

Fetches a single court decision as Markdown, including metadata, summary, full text, and source URL, using the jurisdiction and decision ID.

Instructions

Fetch one court decision as markdown (metadata, summary, full text, source URL).

Args: jurisdiction: code from list_jurisdictions, e.g. "nl", "gb". id: the identifier the source uses, as returned by search_caselaw. nl: ECLI ("ECLI:NL:HR:2024:123"). gb: neutral citation ("[2024] UKSC 1", "[2026] EWHC 2093 (Ch)") or Find Case Law slug ("uksc/2024/1"). max_chars: page size (default 60000). Long decisions end with a note giving the next offset. offset: character offset to continue from (from that note).

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": {
      "jurisdiction": "<jurisdiction>",
      "id": "<id>"
    },
    "name": "get_decision"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
idYes
offsetNo
max_charsNo
jurisdictionYes

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
resultYes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

A4.3/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden: it discloses the output format (markdown), what fields are included, and the pagination mechanism — long decisions end with a note giving the next offset. It does not state auth requirements or explicitly confirm read-only access, but 'Fetch' makes the read nature evident.

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 opening sentence front-loads purpose and return shape, followed by a compact Args block documenting each parameter. It is appropriately sized for a 4-parameter tool with 0% schema coverage, though the wrapped id examples are slightly dense.

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?

Given no annotations, an output schema, and 0% schema description coverage, the description supplies the missing parameter and pagination semantics well. It stops short of covering error behavior (e.g., an unrecognized id format) or permission requirements, which leaves a small gap.

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 description coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate, and it largely does: jurisdiction is a code from list_jurisdictions, id formats are given per jurisdiction with concrete examples (ECLI, neutral citation, Find Case Law slug), and max_chars/offset are explained as page size (default 60000) and continuation from the note. This adds substantial meaning beyond the bare 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?

States a specific verb and resource ('Fetch one court decision as markdown') and enumerates the returned content: metadata, summary, full text, source URL. This clearly distinguishes it from sibling search_caselaw, which returns identifiers rather than decision text.

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 description implies retrieval after search_caselaw (the id is 'as returned by search_caselaw') and points to list_jurisdictions for jurisdiction codes, giving clear workflow context. It does not explicitly state when not to use it, but the fetch-vs-search split is evident from the phrasing.

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