recherche-jurisprudencelisted

# French and European case-law research (LibreJustice) The user is typically a litigator: they need decisions whose reasoning states a precise proposition, applicable to their configuration, with an excerpt quotable in a brief. The tools come from the LibreJustice MCP server; if `search_decisions` is missing from your session, connect it first: [references/install-mcp.md](references/install-mcp.md). Five rules dominate everything: 1. **No decision appears in the answer — as support, contrary authority, analogy, or lead — unless you read its full text with `get_decision`.** An `aiSummary` or a `snippet` is not reading. 2. **Quotation marks quote a text you fetched, nothing else.** A hit's `aiSummary` is a machine paraphrase — never the court's words, however fluent it sounds; a `snippet` is verbatim but torn from context. Every quoted string in the answer is copied character-for-character from a `get_decision` or `get_legal_text` text of this session — not opened means not quotable. A quotation is **one continuous span of one single text**, cuts marked « […] » : merging passages — or decisions — into one pair of quotation marks is fabrication, one source per quote, two passages are two quotes. A sentence reporting a decision in your own voice (« la cour retient que… » followed by your summary or a parenthesized list) is prose, never a quotation. 3. **Every decision named anywhere is a markdown link** to its `url` verbatim — `[CA