{"id":51701,"plugin_id":"plugin_asdk_app_6ac6a5ba362081919de756583296121b","kind":"skill","collection_source":"plugin_package","comparison_source":null,"observed_at":"2026-10-24T13:47:12.874Z","digest":"9082cc7dd84c90cf9b005a7a9fad5096181a1ac5743ea42be7e636f5c7ae8400","against":null,"payload":{"description":"Search U.S. federal and state caselaw in LawDiver with a required jurisdiction, then summarize hits with real citations and good-law flags. Use when the user wants case research, case law search, or authorities on a legal issue. Do not use for non-legal web search, drafting filings, or inventing citations.","included_files":[{"relative_path":"agents/openai.yaml","size_in_bytes":497}],"name":"caselaw-research","skill_md_contents":"---\nname: caselaw-research\ndescription: Search U.S. federal and state caselaw in LawDiver with a required jurisdiction, then summarize hits with real citations and good-law flags. Use when the user wants case research, case law search, or authorities on a legal issue. Do not use for non-legal web search, drafting filings, or inventing citations.\n---\n\n# Caselaw research (LawDiver)\n\nUse LawDiver MCP tools only. Never invent case names, citations, holdings, or good-law status.\n\n## When to use\n\n- User asks to find cases on an issue, doctrine, or fact pattern\n- User wants jurisdiction-scoped caselaw (state, circuit, SCOTUS, federal, etc.)\n- User asks “what cases say about …” or “search caselaw for …”\n\n## Steps\n\n1. If jurisdiction is missing or ambiguous, ask once for the court scope (e.g. California state, Ninth Circuit, all federal). Do not run an unscoped national search.\n2. Call `list_jurisdictions` only when the user needs help choosing a jurisdiction code.\n3. Call `search_cases` with:\n   - `query`: the user’s legal issue in plain language or keywords\n   - `jurisdiction`: required object (`type`, plus `state` / `circuit` when needed)\n   - `searchType`: `auto` unless the query is clearly a citation or case name\n   - `limit`: 5–15 unless the user asks for more\n4. Prefer search hit fields (name, citation, court, date, snippet, good-law flags). Do not treat search snippets as the full opinion.\n5. If the user needs the full opinion text for a hit, call `retrieve_case` (if needed) then `get_opinion_text` with that `caseId`. Paginate with `nextOffset` until you have enough text.\n6. Answer with cited authorities from tool results only. Flag negative treatment / not-good-law when tools report it.\n\n## Do not\n\n- Fabricate citations or quote language that did not come from LawDiver tools\n- Use LawDiver for restaurants, news, or general web browsing\n- Draft or e-file court documents\n- Claim you deleted or edited anything in the corpus (tools are read-only)\n"},"changes":[],"summary":"First saved snapshot. No earlier version is available for comparison.","summary_kind":"deterministic","summary_metadata":{}}