{"uid":"cap_Ig1wyYHF_0HQ1dJDxaixD","slug":"veridictum-legal-single-citation-verifier-e1013279","name":"Veridictum Legal — Single Citation Verifier","description":"Verify one legal citation. Body: {\"citation\": \"<string>\"} - full (\"Miranda v. Arizona, 384 U.S. 436 (1966)\") or bare (\"384 U.S. 436\"); the case name enables mismatch detection. Deterministic: regex plus cache / local corpus / CourtListener, no LLM in the path. status=verified (name confirmed), suspicious (reporter resolves to a DIFFERENT case - the fabrication signature), or not_found. verified=false is a finding, not an error: do not retry. Only verified results are cached.","url":"https://veridictum.legal/api/v1/agent/verify?utm_source=zero.xyz","method":"POST","headers":{},"bodySchema":{"type":"object","properties":{"citation":{"type":"string","minLength":1,"description":"One legal citation. Full (\"Miranda v. Arizona, 384 U.S. 436 (1966)\") or bare (\"384 U.S. 436\"). Supplying the case name is what enables mismatch detection; a bare citation can only be confirmed to exist and returns name_match='not_checked'."}}},"responseSchema":null,"example":null,"exampleRequest":null,"tags":["x402"],"displayCostAmount":"0.01","displayCostAsset":"USDC","priceDynamic":false,"priceHint":null,"priceStatus":"priced","priceSource":"probe","requiresHandshake":false,"reviewCount":0,"rating":{"score":"0.00","successRate":"0.00","reviews":0,"stars":null,"state":"unrated"},"availabilityStatus":"unknown","priceObserved":null,"sessionDeposit":null,"pricing":{"kind":"static","summary":"$0.01/call","primary":{"kind":"static","protocol":"x402","network":"base","amountUsd":"0.01","per":"call","confidence":"exact"},"accepted":[{"kind":"static","protocol":"x402","network":"base","amountUsd":"0.01","per":"call","confidence":"exact"}]},"paymentMethods":[{"uid":"pm_P8rJQmTrWrSGijzj0ZbfL","protocol":"x402","methodType":"crypto","chain":"base","mode":"charge","costAmount":"0.01","costPer":"request","priority":0,"asset":"0x833589fCD6eDb6E08f4c7C32D4f71b54bdA02913","unit":"request","depositMicros":null,"planRef":null}],"brandName":null,"brandSlug":null,"brandBaseUrl":null,"brandDocsUrl":null,"whatItDoes":"Verifies a single legal citation against a 14.2M-case corpus (CourtListener), detecting whether the case name matches the reporter citation or reveals a hallucinated reference.","exampleAgentPrompt":"Can you verify that 'Roe v. Wade, 410 U.S. 113 (1973)' is a real citation and that the case name actually matches that reporter volume and page?","exampleUseCases":[{"title":"AI brief hallucination check","prompt":"I just got a legal memo from an AI assistant with this citation: 'Chevron U.S.A. Inc. v. Natural Resources Defense Council, 467 U.S. 837 (1984)' — can you verify it's real and that the case name isn't mismatched to the wrong reporter citation?"},{"title":"Law student research validation","prompt":"Before I submit my paper, can you check whether 'Miranda v. Arizona, 384 U.S. 436 (1966)' is a verified citation with the name correctly matched to that volume and page?"},{"title":"Suspicious citation audit","prompt":"A contract I'm reviewing cites 'Smith v. Jones, 529 U.S. 205 (2000)' — can you run that through Veridictum to see if it's verified, suspicious (name mismatch), or just not found at all?"}],"resultDescription":"Returns a status field of 'verified' (case name confirmed to match the reporter citation), 'suspicious' (the reporter citation resolves to a DIFFERENT case — the hallucination signature), or 'not_found' (citation does not exist in the corpus). Also returns a name_match field ('confirmed', 'mismatch', or 'not_checked' for bare citations). A non-verified result is a definitive finding — agents should not retry.","failureModes":["Bare citation without case name returns name_match='not_checked' — mismatch detection is unavailable","not_found is a valid finding, not a transient error — retrying will return the same result","Citations outside the 14.2M-case corpus may return not_found even if they exist","Malformed citation strings (missing volume or page) may fail regex parsing","status=suspicious is itself the hallucination signal and should be treated as a finding, not an error"],"whenToPreferThis":"Choose this endpoint when you need to verify a single legal citation with high deterministic accuracy — especially when you have a full citation including the case name and need to detect name-reporter mismatches (the hallucination signature). Prefer the batch sibling endpoint when verifying multiple citations at once. This endpoint is purpose-built for detecting AI-hallucinated legal references and is backed by a 14.2M-case corpus with no LLM in the verification path, making it more reliable than asking an LLM to self-verify its own citations.","instructions":null,"reviewSummary":null,"reviewSummaryHighlights":null,"reviewSummaryConcerns":null,"reviewSummaryGeneratedAt":null,"activationCount":0,"lastUsedAt":null,"lastSuccessfullyRanAt":null,"lastHealthCheckAt":"2026-10-12T06:36:05.142Z","isFirstParty":false,"canonicalSlug":"veridictum-legal-single-citation-verifier-e1013279"}