Release Notes

We released two public GitHub projects for people who want to use Descrybe Legal Engine beyond the built-in assistant setup guides.

The workflow repository is the assistant recipe layer. The Python SDK is the app-building layer. Descrybe Legal Engine remains the source-law research service behind both.

Open Descrybe Legal Research Workflows on GitHub

Open Descrybe Legal Engine Python on GitHub

Read the workflow guide if you want ready-made assistant research patterns.

Read the Python SDK guide if you are building an app, script, or coding-agent project.

You can now connect Descrybe Legal Engine to ChatGPT, so ChatGPT can use Descrybe legal research tools while you stay in the ChatGPT conversation.

After you connect your Descrybe account, ChatGPT can ask Descrybe to search for cases, look up citations, search laws and rules, check treatment, verify quotes, and pull source material when those tools are useful for your question.

Your Descrybe subscription works across supported assistants and apps as they become available. You do not need a separate Descrybe subscription just for ChatGPT.

Read the ChatGPT setup guide for step-by-step connection help.

Laws & Rules still works when you type ordinary issue words, like “paid sick leave accrual rules” or “sports betting age limits.”

Now, when you already know the statute you want, you can enter the citation directly instead of working backward from keywords.

You can also combine a citation with a short issue description, which is helpful when you are checking a list of authorities or trying to see whether a cited section appears to line up with the question in front of you.

Coverage still varies by jurisdiction and source type, but citation-aware searching should make supported statutes easier to find and review.

Learn more about Laws & Rules in the user guide.

You can now add Descrybe Legal Engine to Perplexity as a custom connector, so Perplexity can use Descrybe legal research tools during a chat.

This gives Perplexity a source-grounded legal research path for finding primary law, looking up citations, checking treatment, verifying quotes, and returning source material you can inspect.

You will need an active Descrybe Legal Engine or Platform subscription, along with Perplexity access that supports custom connectors. Once Descrybe is connected, start a new Perplexity chat with Descrybe Legal Engine selected so Perplexity knows to use it from the start.

Read the Perplexity setup guide for the step-by-step connector walkthrough.

Concept Search in Descrybe Platform now gives you more control over where you search. Start typing a court, jurisdiction, court type, or abbreviation, and Descrybe will suggest matching options.

You can search broadly across all courts, or narrow your search to the exact place that matters, such as a federal district court, state appellate court, bankruptcy court, or a specific jurisdiction.

You do not need to know the full court name or scroll through a long list of filters. Type what you know, choose the best match, and search. This helps reduce irrelevant results, makes jurisdiction-specific case-law research faster, and gives you more control without making the search experience feel complicated.

Learn more about Concept Search in the user guide.

Descrybe Platform now includes searchable decisions from the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB), the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board (TTAB), and the Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA).

These collections can be searched directly in Platform, so researchers can focus on patent, trademark, and immigration decisions without treating them like ordinary state or federal court results.

This is part of our broader work to make specialized and agency tribunals easier to find, filter, and use alongside Descrybe case-law research.

We added a public coverage map so you can see which courts, jurisdictions, statutes, regulations, and constitutions are currently included in Descrybe's U.S. primary-law corpus.

The map is organized by federal and state case law, bankruptcy courts, specialized and agency tribunals, tribal courts, and Laws & Rules. For case-law sources, it includes opinion counts and available date ranges where those details are available.

It also gives users and teams a clearer way to understand what is searchable today and which source collections are still being added.

View the coverage map for the current snapshot.

Case Name Search is now much better at finding the right case even when you do not have the caption exactly right.

It can work with partial or incomplete party names, missing caption details, reversed party order, and common caption clutter like business suffixes or role labels.

That means you can often search from what you remember instead of stopping to reconstruct the formal case name first. If a party name is very short or common, adding the other party, jurisdiction, or year can still help narrow things down.

You can now connect Descrybe Legal Engine to Claude, so Claude can use Descrybe legal research tools while you stay in the Claude conversation.

After you connect your Descrybe account, Claude can ask Descrybe to search for cases, look up citations, search laws and rules, check treatment, verify quotes, and pull source material when those tools are useful for your question.

This is designed to make legal research in Claude more grounded and easier to inspect. Claude remains the chat interface, and Descrybe provides the legal research layer behind the tool calls.

Concept Search now defaults to Authority order, so your first results are not just close wording matches. The goal is to bring forward cases that look both relevant and worth reviewing early.

Results can now include plain-language notes about why a case appears relevant, why it may be useful authority, and what later treatment suggests. These notes are meant to help you triage faster without making you interpret raw ranking scores.

Legal Issue Explorer also does a better job surfacing leading cases for a selected issue and jurisdiction, including closely related issue wording that might otherwise be easy to miss.

As always, these improvements are there to help you decide what to inspect first. You should still open important cases and review the underlying authority before relying on it.

We streamlined DescrybeLM Research so it moves from clarifying your question into research more directly. The experience should feel faster, smoother, and more reliable, especially for questions that need a little extra context before research begins.

Descrybe Review now lets you print or save the report as a PDF.

This makes it easy to create a clean copy of the full review output to share, download, or keep for your records.

PDFs are generated from the on-screen report itself, with a presentation designed for a polished saved or printed version.

Descrybe Review now does a better job connecting short cites and chained cites, including patterns like "985 A.2d at 1106," to the right full case, even when only part of a brief is reviewed.

If a Westlaw or Lexis cite does not match right away, we now make a stronger second pass using case-name candidates and opinion text before we link it.

Quote review has been improved to go beyond quote presence and better measure quote fidelity. You may see exact, fragment, or unclear when wording appears clipped or cannot be fully verified from available text.

Support analysis has also been strengthened to better evaluate whether the cited authority supports the legal proposition being made, not just whether the citation exists. Results may show supported, partially supported, unsupported, or not enough source text.

Pinpoint review is now better at reading contextual "at" and page references, and it more clearly separates directional support from pinpoint support we cannot verify.

Descrybe Review is now better at flagging possible overstatement or out-of-pattern use when a case appears to be described differently from how courts usually describe it.

When the same-caption case has multiple opinions, we now do a better job matching quoted language to the correct opinion variant instead of treating all variants as equivalent.

Findings are also easier to triage, with clearer reason codes and confidence labels so attorneys can quickly separate likely citation risk from source-coverage limits.

We currently have original judicial opinion documents available for about 3.3 million opinions.

Depending on the court source, an original opinion document may be in PDF or Word format.

For opinions where an original judicial opinion document is not available, you can now generate a printable PDF directly from the case details page.

This makes it easier to save, share, print, and review full opinion text in a familiar document format, even when an original court document is not on file.

When you reopen a DescrybeLM Research matter, completed steps now do a better job showing the clarifying questions alongside your responses, so each step is easier to understand at a glance.

The session activity feed is now less repetitive, so the same clarification text does not keep appearing over and over as you scroll through saved events.

Restored sessions are also better at keeping your final research output and Word doc available after reload.

When you open a case from Concept Search and go back to your results, your previous results now come back much faster instead of making you wait for the same search again.

This makes it easier to review several cases in a row without losing your place.

Moving between search results and full case details should now feel smoother overall.

We are beginning the rollout of DescrybeLM Workflows across the platform, with a more task-specific approach to legal work inside Descrybe.

DescrybeLM Research was first, giving you a guided workflow for legal analysis and follow-up questions in the same matter.

Now Descrybe Review is here as well, with a brief-centered workflow for checking citations, quoted language, source support, and how a case is usually cited.

Laws & Rules now includes United States statutes and regulations, so you can search federal statutes and regulations alongside our growing state coverage. DescrybeLM can use these authorities in its research as well.

Current state coverage includes Arizona statutes, regulations, and constitutions; California statutes; Florida statutes, regulations, and constitutions; Massachusetts statutes and regulations; New Jersey statutes; New York statutes; Ohio statutes and regulations; Rhode Island statutes and regulations; and Texas statutes and regulations.

If there is a state you would like us to prioritize next, please let us know!

We expanded the user guide for DescrybeLM and more of the research tools, so it is easier to understand what each tool is best for before you start searching.

The new guides explain search strategies in plain language, including when to use concept search, keyword search, case name search, citation lookup, and laws and rules search.

They also do a better job showing what you can click and review inside the platform, so it is easier to move from a result to the original authority or the most relevant matching text.

We tightened up the DescrybeLM workflow so each step feels more consistent as you move from question intake to clarifications, coverage checks, and final research.

If DescrybeLM needs you to confirm a plan or answer a question before continuing, it is now better at bringing you back to that exact point instead of making you start over.

The overall process should feel more dependable and easier to follow, especially during longer research sessions.

Past DescrybeLM sessions now restore more completely when you reopen them, including in-progress steps that were waiting on your input.

Saved session activity is shown more clearly for reference, so it is easier to see how a matter progressed over time.

Older session history remains supported, so previous work should continue to open safely even if it was created before these improvements.