UN Charter 1945

A semantic SEARCH over formalised law: a question or a notion in your own words → candidates with addresses — predicates with signatures, rules, article fragments. This is the layer of DISCOVERY, not of the answer: the result says WHAT to ask next (law_ask by signature, law_rules, law_sources) and establishes neither a fact nor a norm. The ranking is a deterministic lexical embedder (DECISION-0040

Passport of an exact release: purpose, interface, boundaries, checks and performance. The reports section holds the history of measurements, failures included. Entries are paged by JSON Pointer; next continues the answer.

A machine-readable matrix of the Lens producers that are actually installed, of replay/projection checks, profiles, limits and the contract tests that confirm them. declared_only means a schema with no executable witness.

Run a registered producer and obtain producerControl/0.2 for a later verifiable preparation of a Lens. The producer is chosen only from the shipped registry.

At the explicit request of the user, repeat between 1 and 12 earlier law_ask or law_process_run calls (the course of a case, DECISION-0160), compare their replayControl strictly, and prepare a non-public frozen document for 24 hours. The client never supplies the machine answer: the server obtains it only by executing afresh. A divergence in any input, in the law, in a resource, in the server code

Publish a prepared document. Repeating it with the same preparationId idempotently returns the same URL and the same separate revocation secret.

Revoke a published document using its separate secret. The public id alone grants no control; revocation closes the HTML page, the API and the download.

The catalogue of formalised law: instruments, predicates with signatures, the boundaries of coverage. This is where the NAMES of predicates come from — they must never be guessed. But do NOT start from the catalogue when looking for the right instrument: the overview is large, and the title of an instrument rarely matches the words of a question ("Newton's laws of motion" contains no word "physics

Put a question to formalised law. When the answer is "not established" it carries whyNot — the engine's why_not report §185: the candidate rules and the state of every conjunct (satisfied / not satisfied / undetermined); the missing facts are visible there and need not be guessed. BEFORE THE FIRST call obtain the predicate names through law_search (a question in your own words → addresses) or law_

Build a necessary condition — a superset — for the preliminary selection of rows from an external source (DECISION-0120). This is NOT a legal answer and NOT SQL: the result is a typed tree and a manifest of the extensions up to TRUE. Every row that passes must then be computed in full by the engine, with a proof graph, on the same snapshot of the data. The binding is passed as a pinnable object; s

The rules of formalised law put into words: exactly how a predicate is derived (premises, source articles). Call this BEFORE supplying facts to law_ask — the rules say which facts are needed instead of leaving them to be guessed. For large instruments package=… returns a table of contents; the full text comes from predicate=…. The listing by package is paged: limit (20 by default, 500 at most) and

Unfold the proof of a law_ask answer into a chain "rule ← premises → conclusion". The compact input: question (the original law_ask arguments, truth/collect), resultHash and codeHash from the provenance of the answer. The server repeats the computation and compares the hashes; if anything changed it refuses explicitly. Alternatively pass the evaluation from law_ask(proof=true). answerResource=full

The ask operation §168.4 (DECISION-0165, DECISION-0399): run a registered case of a case package over its pinned dependencies and return the canonical evaluation document with a proof and a manifest. The question is JSON per query.schema.json (query), an evaluate string (evaluate + queryId), a saved queryId without query, or card + args. A refusal to prepare is an error with an LDC-* code, never a

Sources: by default short excerpts (view=summary), 5 texts per page, with the address of the full text in fragments[].full. Either package or fragment is required (a StableId from law_search/law_rules). view=full returns exact parts of the text: textRange sets a range of Unicode characters, fragments[].next is the continuation with a contentHash. The hash refers to the WHOLE source, not to the exc

How robust a conclusion is: the map of the dispute under the argumentation profile §274 (DECISION-0039). The answer falls into four classes: SKEPTICALLY_ACCEPTED — the conclusion is invulnerable (it survives in the grounded extension); CREDULOUSLY_ACCEPTED — merely defensible (there is a position for it and a position against); REJECTED — it survives nowhere; NO_ARGUMENT — there are no arguments a

Which stages the procedure established by an instrument consists of, and whether it carries a structural defect (O-5, DECISION-0052). The stages, the transitions and the condition of every transition are reconstructed from the formalisation rather than retold: what leads from where to where, and under what condition. The check of the graph: unreachable stages, dead transitions, a transition that e

How a particular case will run, step by step (O-5, DECISION-0052): a log of {date, attempt?, facts?} is executed frame by frame, and the law of each frame is the law of ITS date. The answer says: which stages have been entered; which attempted transition produced NO legal effect (§164 — "the act was performed but did not take place"); which duties are violated and which time limits are running; wh

The axis of editions (O-2): what changed in an instrument between two dates of the law — the state of the editions, the dating of the norms and the semantic diff §215 between the D1 projections. The verdict NOT_DATED means "there was nothing to date it by", not "nothing changed". The outcome of a particular question on a date comes from law_ask with legalTime.

A deterministic LawQL query over the CLIR of a formalization: a question about the model of the act itself, not about a case. Relations: nodes(id,kind,package,package_name,path), edges(from,to,role), anchors(node,anchor,act,locator,path), labels(node,lang,text,status), fields(node,field,value,value_kind), rules(id,strength,head_predicate,head_polarity,head_variables,body_variables,body_predicates)

A REPORT of a divergence between the formalisation and the source: the answer contradicts the pinned text, a norm of the source is not expressed by a rule, a §218 label diverges from the text, an address cannot be found. A report is a hypothesis for triage by a formaliser: it does NOT change the law, it never reaches the answers of the other tools, and "not derived" does not become "derived" becau