# Nalegalu MCP

> Semantic search over Polish law and case law, citing the exact in-force article.

- name: io.github.nalegaluorg/nalegalu
- version: 1.0.0
- connection class: R0 (autonomous)
- trust: 90/100
- quality: 86/100 (good)
- owner: not claimed
- descriptor: https://api.protogrid.dev/v1/servers/io.github.nalegaluorg%2Fnalegalu
- tools: https://api.protogrid.dev/v1/servers/io.github.nalegaluorg%2Fnalegalu/tools

**An agent can connect right now, no human step.** Remote endpoint, no authentication, reachable on the last probe.

## Connection (mcpServers)

```json
{
  "mcpServers": {
    "nalegalu": {
      "type": "http",
      "url": "https://mcp.nalegalu.org/mcp"
    }
  }
}
```


## Trust

- hygiene: 100
- liveness: 100
- freshness: 65
- provenance: 90
- drivers: +repository +namespace-matches-repo +website +reachable +uptime-100% ~updated-91d-ago
- Derived from observable signals (official registry feed and our own credential-free probes); no code audit performed.

## Quality 86/100 (good)

### protocol: 88 (weight 25)

- pass `protocol.modern`: supports 2026-07-28 (server/discover)
- pass `protocol.stateless`: answers without a session
- pass `protocol.transport`: streamable HTTP
- warn `protocol.list_ttl`: tools/list declares ttlMs 0, so clients re-fetch it on every use

### authorization: n/a (weight 15)

- n/a `auth.prm`, `auth.as_metadata`, `auth.cimd`: no remote uses OAuth
- n/a `auth.secret_in_url`: no templated URL

### tool hygiene: 79 (weight 30)

- pass `tools.descriptions`: every tool has a description
- warn `tools.description_length`: 1 tools have descriptions over 1,024 characters, which crowds the context
- pass `tools.schemas`: every tool has an object input schema
- pass `tools.annotations`: 7 of 7 tools declare readOnlyHint or destructiveHint
- fail `tools.directory_hints`: no tool declares all four of readOnlyHint, destructiveHint, idempotentHint and openWorldHint; missing: search_law (idempotentHint); get_article (idempotentHint); related_cases (idempotentHint); …
- pass `tools.token_cost`: about 2,210 tokens to load every tool
- pass `tools.api_dump`: tools are not a one-to-one API dump

### stability: 100 (weight 15)

- pass `stability.changes`: 5 tool changes in 30 days
- pass `stability.rug_pull`: no tool changed its meaning under the same name

### dependencies: n/a (weight 15)

- n/a `deps.known_vulns`, `deps.mcp_sdk_version`, `deps.resolvable`: no npm or PyPI package

- tools: 7, about 2,210 tokens to load them all
- tool set hash: 5ce1619b7e90ce9c3ae928961132c762
- tools last changed: 2026-10-17T20:03:41.973Z
- badge: [![protogrid quality](https://protogrid.dev/badge/io.github.nalegaluorg/nalegalu.svg)](https://protogrid.dev/servers/io.github.nalegaluorg/nalegalu)
- Checks run on what our credential-free, read-only probes observe; tools are never called and no code audit is performed.

### Tool changes

- 2026-10-17 `related_cases` changed (description)
  - before: List SAOS cases related to one statutory provision. Use after identifying a relevant provision. A related-case link is not proof of a legal rule: inspect the judgment with get_case before asserting its holding. Deterministic lookup by act address (e.g. WDU19740240141) and article key. Returns case number, court, date, relevance score when available, and a SAOS link per case; scored cases sort first. Newer data also carries citation context per case: mentions (how many times the article appears in the judgment text), mention_match ("exact" = found with a matching act marker; "ambiguous" = bare mention, possibly another act's article — discount it), and context (snippet around the mention). mentions=0 or a missing context means the link comes from SAOS metadata but the text scan could not confirm it — treat relevance as unverified rather than assuming the case is on point. If count is zero, it means this local provision-to-case link dataset has no rows; it is not an exhaustive SAOS or case-law search.
  - after: List SAOS cases related to one statutory provision. Use after identifying a relevant provision. A related-case link is not proof of a legal rule: inspect the judgment with get_case before asserting its holding. Deterministic lookup by act address (e.g. WDU19740240141) and article key. Returns case number, court, date, relevance score when available, and a SAOS link per case; scored cases sort first. Newer data also carries citation context per case: mentions (how many times the article appears in the judgment text), mention_match ("exact" = found with a matching act marker; "ambiguous" = bare mention, possibly another act's article — discount it), and context (snippet around the mention). mentions=0 or a missing context means the link comes from SAOS metadata but the text scan could not confirm it — treat relevance as unverified rather than assuming the case is on point. If count is zero, it means this local provision-to-case link dataset has no rows; it is not an exhaustive SAOS or case-law search. sources counts matching local rows before cross-source deduplication and the display limit; read sources_note before interpreting them.
- 2026-09-29 `verify_quote` changed (annotations)
- 2026-09-29 `search_case_by_signature` changed (annotations)
- 2026-09-29 `get_case` changed (description, annotations)
  - before: Fetch one SAOS court judgment (metadata + bounded text excerpt). Use only with a saos_id returned by related_cases or search_case_by_signature. Long judgments are paged: when has_more is true, call again with offset=next_offset. If the response has ok=false with a fallback hint, SAOS is unavailable or rate-limited — fetch the returned saos_url yourself with your own web tools instead of retrying this tool.
  - after: Fetch one SAOS court judgment (metadata + bounded text excerpt). Use only with a saos_id returned by related_cases, research_cases, or search_case_by_signature. Long judgments are paged: when has_more is true, call again with offset=next_offset. If the response has ok=false with a fallback hint, SAOS is unavailable or rate-limited — fetch the returned saos_url yourself with your own web tools instead of retrying this tool.
- 2026-09-29 `research_cases` changed (annotations)

Full history: https://api.protogrid.dev/v1/servers/io.github.nalegaluorg%2Fnalegalu/changes

## Remotes

- https://mcp.nalegalu.org/mcp (streamable-http, auth none, reachable true, uptime30d 1)

## Packages

_none_

## Tools (7)

- `get_article`: Fetch the exact text of one article (or paragraph) of a Polish legal act.

        Use after search_law or another trusted source supplied the address and
        article key; never guess them. Deterministic lookup by act address
        (e.g. WDU19740240141) and article
        key (e.g. "133" or "Art. 133."). Optional paragraph_key (e.g. "1" or
        "§ 1.") narrows the result to a single paragraph.
        
- `get_case`: Fetch one SAOS court judgment (metadata + bounded text excerpt).

        Use only with a saos_id returned by related_cases, research_cases, or
        search_case_by_signature. Long judgments
        are paged: when has_more is true, call again with offset=next_offset.
        If the response has ok=false with a fallback hint, SAOS is unavailable
        or rate-limited — fetch the returned saos_url yourself with your own
        web tools instead of retrying this tool.
        
- `related_cases`: List SAOS cases related to one statutory provision.

        Use after identifying a relevant provision. A related-case link is not
        proof of a legal rule: inspect the judgment with get_case before
        asserting its holding. Deterministic lookup by act address
        (e.g. WDU19740240141) and article
        key. Returns case number, court, date, relevance score when available,
        and a SAOS link per case; scored cases sort first. Newer data also
        carries citation context per case: mentions (how many times the
        article appears in the judgment text), mention_match ("exact" =
        found with a matching act marker; "ambiguous" = bare mention,
        possibly another act's article — discount it), and context (snippet
        around the mention). mentions=0 or a missing context means the link
        comes from SAOS metadata but the text scan could not confirm it —
        treat relevance as unverified rather than assuming the case is on
        point. If count is zero, it means this local provision-to-case link
        dataset has no rows; it is not an exhaustive SAOS or case-law search.
        sources counts matching local rows before cross-source deduplication
        and the display limit; read sources_note before interpreting them.
        
- `research_cases`: Discover related-case candidates for a natural-language legal issue.

        This tool first searches statutes, then follows local provision-to-case
        links for several distinct provisions and deduplicates by SAOS ID.
        ``rerank=false`` is the inexpensive deterministic discovery stage.
        With ``rerank=true``, it fetches at most ``rerank_fetch_limit`` public
        SAOS excerpts and reranks them only when the server has explicitly
        configured a Cohere reranker. It never decides a holding: call
        ``get_case`` for every judgment used in an answer.
        
- `search_case_by_signature`: Verify a cited case signature (sygnatura), e.g. "II CSK 448/14".

        Use before relying on a judgment cited by a user or another agent.
        Answers from a local index of all SAOS judgments first; only on a
        local miss does it query live SAOS. Read the verdict field:
        "confirmed" (matches listed with saos_id, court, date, type —
        different courts reuse signatures, so check the court), "not_found"
        (strong evidence the citation is fabricated or wrong),
        "outside_coverage" (administrative courts NSA/WSA are not in SAOS —
        verify in CBOSA instead), "unverified" (local miss and SAOS
        unreachable; do not treat as nonexistent). Optional court_type:
        COMMON, SUPREME, CONSTITUTIONAL_TRIBUNAL, NATIONAL_APPEAL_CHAMBER.
        has_text=false on a match means SAOS stores no text for it, so
        verify_quote cannot check quotes against that judgment.
        
- `search_law`: Search current Polish statutes and return article-level hits.

        Start here for a natural-language legal issue or a direct citation.
        Use the user's own Polish wording, e.g. "kupiłem wadliwy towar od
        firmy jakie mam prawa". Do not add address, domain, article, act_type,
        or status filters unless the user explicitly supplied that restriction.
        Results are primary-source material, not legal advice.
        
- `verify_quote`: Check whether a supplied quote appears in a SAOS judgment.

        Use only after resolving the judgment to a saos_id. This validates
        wording, not whether the quote supports a legal conclusion. Pass the
        saos_id (from search_case_by_signature or related_cases) and
        the fragment as quoted. One call replaces paging through the full
        text: verdict is "exact" (verbatim after normalizing whitespace,
        quote marks and dashes), "near_match" (best passage plus similarity
        score — compare it against the claim), or "not_found" (treat the
        quote as fabricated or misattributed). If ok=false with a fallback
        hint, fetch saos_url with your own web tools instead of retrying.