@wentorai/research-plugins 1.0.0 → 1.2.0

package/skills/domains/humanities/history-research-guide/SKILL.md

@@ -0,0 +1,260 @@
+---
+name: history-research-guide
+description: "Historical research from primary sources to scholarly analysis"
+metadata:
+  openclaw:
+    emoji: "📜"
+    category: "domains"
+    subcategory: "humanities"
+    keywords: ["history", "primary sources", "archives", "historiography", "digital humanities", "periodization"]
+    source: "https://github.com/historicalsources"
+---
+
+# History Research Guide
+
+## Overview
+
+Historical research transforms raw evidence from the past -- documents, artifacts, images, oral testimonies -- into interpretive accounts that explain how and why things happened. The discipline demands a distinctive set of skills: source criticism, archival navigation, contextual reasoning, and the ability to construct arguments that are both evidence-based and theoretically informed.
+
+The digital turn has expanded the historian's toolkit dramatically. Digitized archives, text mining, GIS mapping, and network analysis now complement traditional close reading. But the fundamentals remain unchanged: rigorous engagement with primary sources, awareness of historiographical debates, and transparent argumentation.
+
+This guide covers the full research workflow for historians: finding and evaluating primary sources, navigating archives (physical and digital), applying source criticism, structuring historical arguments, and leveraging digital tools for analysis. It serves researchers at all levels, from graduate students designing their first archival project to established scholars integrating computational methods.
+
+## Source Criticism: The Foundation
+
+### External Criticism (Authenticity)
+
+```
+Questions to establish source authenticity:
+
+1. PROVENANCE
+   - Where did this document come from?
+   - What is the chain of custody?
+   - Has it been reproduced, translated, or edited?
+
+2. DATING
+   - When was it created? (Internal evidence: dates, references to events)
+   - Does the material form match the claimed period? (paper, ink, typeface)
+   - Are there anachronisms in language or content?
+
+3. AUTHORSHIP
+   - Who created it? How do we know?
+   - Is the attribution reliable? (Handwriting analysis, stylistic evidence)
+   - Could it be pseudonymous or falsely attributed?
+
+4. INTEGRITY
+   - Is the document complete or fragmentary?
+   - Has it been altered, censored, or interpolated?
+   - Are there multiple versions? Which is closest to the original?
+```
+
+### Internal Criticism (Reliability and Meaning)
+
+```
+Questions to interpret source content:
+
+1. CONTEXT
+   - What was happening when this was written?
+   - What was the author's social position, education, ideology?
+   - What genre conventions shaped the document?
+
+2. INTENTION
+   - Why was this created? (Inform, persuade, record, entertain)
+   - Who was the intended audience?
+   - What was the author trying to achieve?
+
+3. RELIABILITY
+   - Was the author in a position to know what they describe?
+   - What biases might shape the account?
+   - How does it compare with other sources on the same events?
+
+4. SILENCES
+   - What is NOT said? Who is absent from the account?
+   - What topics does the source avoid or minimize?
+   - What perspectives are excluded?
+```
+
+## Archival Research
+
+### Preparing for the Archive
+
+```
+Pre-visit checklist:
+
+1. FINDING AIDS
+   - Search online catalogs and finding aids before visiting
+   - Identify relevant record groups, series, and box numbers
+   - Contact the archivist: they know the collection better than anyone
+
+2. PRACTICAL PREPARATION
+   - Check policies: photography allowed? Laptop permitted?
+   - Bring: pencils (no pens), laptop, camera, white gloves, notebook
+   - Register in advance (many archives require pre-registration)
+   - Book a desk (popular archives fill up, especially in summer)
+
+3. RESEARCH PLAN
+   - Prioritize: You cannot read everything. What is essential?
+   - Prepare a list of specific documents, people, dates to search for
+   - Allow time for serendipity -- unexpected finds are common
+
+4. DOCUMENTATION
+   - Record full archival citations for every document:
+     [Archive Name], [Collection Name], [Series], [Box], [Folder], [Item]
+   - Photograph everything you might need (storage is cheap)
+   - Take contextual notes alongside transcriptions
+```
+
+### Major Digital Archives
+
+| Archive | Coverage | Access |
+|---------|----------|--------|
+| Internet Archive | 835B+ web pages, 44M+ books | Free |
+| HathiTrust | 17M+ volumes from research libraries | Free (public domain) |
+| JSTOR | 12M+ academic articles | Institutional subscription |
+| Europeana | 50M+ cultural heritage objects | Free |
+| Gallica (BnF) | French national library digitized | Free |
+| DPLA | US libraries, archives, museums | Free |
+| National Archives (US) | Federal government records | Free |
+| British National Archives | UK government records | Free/paid |
+| Google Books | Millions of scanned books | Partial free |
+| ProQuest Historical Newspapers | Major newspaper archives | Institutional |
+
+## Historiographical Frameworks
+
+### Schools of Historical Thought
+
+| School | Key Ideas | Key Figures |
+|--------|-----------|-------------|
+| Rankean positivism | "wie es eigentlich gewesen" (as it actually was) | Ranke |
+| Annales School | Longue duree, mentalites, total history | Bloch, Braudel, Le Roy Ladurie |
+| Marxist historiography | Class struggle, mode of production | Thompson, Hobsbawm, Hill |
+| Social history | History from below, ordinary people | Thompson, Zinn |
+| Cultural history | Representations, meaning, symbols | Darnton, Chartier, Burke |
+| Postcolonial history | Subaltern voices, decolonizing the archive | Said, Spivak, Chakrabarty |
+| Gender history | Gender as analytical category | Scott, Butler |
+| Microhistory | Intensive study of small units | Ginzburg, Davis |
+| Digital history | Computational methods, big data | Moretti, Underwood |
+| Global history | Connected, entangled, transnational | Bayly, Conrad |
+
+### Braudel's Three Temporalities
+
+```
+Time layers in historical analysis:
+
+1. LONGUE DUREE (centuries)
+   - Geography, climate, demographics
+   - Slow structural change
+   - Example: Mediterranean trade routes, 500 BCE - 1500 CE
+
+2. CONJUNCTURES (decades)
+   - Economic cycles, social trends, institutional change
+   - Medium-term patterns
+   - Example: Rise and fall of Atlantic slave trade, 1500-1888
+
+3. EVENTS (days to years)
+   - Political events, battles, treaties, revolutions
+   - Surface history, "l'histoire evenementielle"
+   - Example: Fall of the Berlin Wall, November 9, 1989
+
+Research tip: Strong historical arguments often operate across
+multiple temporalities simultaneously.
+```
+
+## Digital Methods for Historians
+
+### Text Mining Historical Sources
+
+```python
+# Example: Word frequency analysis across a corpus of historical documents
+from collections import Counter
+import re
+
+def analyze_historical_corpus(texts: list, period_labels: list) -> dict:
+    """
+    Track keyword frequency across historical periods.
+    Useful for tracing conceptual change (Begriffsgeschichte).
+    """
+    period_counts = {}
+    for text, period in zip(texts, period_labels):
+        words = re.findall(r'\b[a-z]+\b', text.lower())
+        if period not in period_counts:
+            period_counts[period] = Counter()
+        period_counts[period].update(words)
+
+    return period_counts
+
+# Track usage of key concepts over time
+def track_concept(period_counts: dict, concept_terms: list) -> dict:
+    """Track normalized frequency of concept terms across periods."""
+    results = {}
+    for period, counts in sorted(period_counts.items()):
+        total = sum(counts.values())
+        concept_freq = sum(counts.get(term, 0) for term in concept_terms)
+        results[period] = {
+            "raw_count": concept_freq,
+            "per_million": (concept_freq / total) * 1_000_000 if total > 0 else 0,
+        }
+    return results
+
+# Example: Track "liberty" vs. "order" in political texts
+# liberty_trend = track_concept(corpus, ["liberty", "freedom", "rights"])
+# order_trend = track_concept(corpus, ["order", "authority", "stability"])
+```
+
+### GIS for Historical Analysis
+
+```
+Applications of GIS in historical research:
+
+- Mapping migration patterns (transatlantic slave trade routes)
+- Spatial analysis of urban development (Paris renovation, 1853-1870)
+- Battle reconstruction (troop movements, terrain analysis)
+- Disease mapping (John Snow's cholera map, modernized)
+- Trade network visualization (Silk Road, maritime routes)
+- Land use change over time (enclosure, deforestation)
+
+Tools: QGIS (free), ArcGIS, Google Earth Engine
+Data: HGIS (Historical GIS), Natural Earth, GADM
+```
+
+## Writing Historical Research
+
+```
+Article structure (American Historical Review style):
+
+1. OPENING (1-2 pages)
+   - Narrative opening or striking primary source quotation
+   - Situate within historiographical debate
+   - Thesis statement (explicit and arguable)
+
+2. BODY (15-25 pages)
+   - Organized chronologically OR thematically
+   - Each section advances the argument
+   - Primary source evidence drives every claim
+   - Engage with counterarguments and alternative interpretations
+   - Footnotes: full citations, also substantive discussion
+
+3. CONCLUSION (1-2 pages)
+   - Restate thesis in light of evidence presented
+   - Broader implications for the field
+   - Open questions for future research
+
+Citation style: Chicago Manual of Style (notes-bibliography)
+```
+
+## Best Practices
+
+- **Always return to the primary source.** Secondary sources summarize; primary sources surprise.
+- **Triangulate.** Use multiple independent sources to corroborate claims.
+- **Historicize your categories.** "Democracy," "race," "the state" meant different things in different periods.
+- **Acknowledge what the sources cannot tell you.** Silence is data.
+- **Read against the grain.** Sources reveal not just what they intend but what they take for granted.
+- **Cite archival sources precisely.** Other researchers must be able to find the same document.
+
+## References
+
+- Bloch, M. (1953). The Historian's Craft. Vintage Books.
+- Tosh, J. (2015). The Pursuit of History: Aims, Methods and New Directions. Routledge, 6th ed.
+- [Zotero](https://www.zotero.org/) -- Reference management with Chicago style support
+- [Internet Archive](https://archive.org/) -- Universal access to human knowledge
+- [Programming Historian](https://programminghistorian.org/) -- Digital methods tutorials for historians

package/skills/domains/humanities/political-history-guide/SKILL.md

@@ -0,0 +1,241 @@
+---
+name: political-history-guide
+description: "Chinese and European political struggle history and comparative analysis"
+metadata:
+  openclaw:
+    emoji: "🗳️"
+    category: "domains"
+    subcategory: "humanities"
+    keywords: ["political history", "comparative politics", "Chinese history", "European history", "state formation", "revolution"]
+    source: "https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/political-history/"
+---
+
+# Political History Guide
+
+## Overview
+
+Political history examines the struggle for power, the formation of states, the dynamics of revolution and reform, and the evolution of political ideas across time and space. This guide focuses on comparative political history, drawing on Chinese and European traditions to illuminate how different civilizations have organized political authority, managed conflict, and theorized the relationship between rulers and ruled.
+
+Comparing Chinese and European political development is one of the most productive exercises in historical social science. Both civilizations produced sophisticated state systems, bureaucratic administrations, and political philosophies -- but through radically different paths. Understanding these divergences helps researchers avoid Eurocentric assumptions and develop more robust theories of political change.
+
+This guide covers key periods and themes in both traditions, methods for comparative historical analysis, and the theoretical frameworks that scholars use to explain political transformation. It is designed for researchers working on political history, comparative politics, historical sociology, or area studies who need to engage with both traditions.
+
+## Chinese Political History: Key Periods
+
+### Imperial State Formation
+
+| Period | Key Development | Significance |
+|--------|----------------|--------------|
+| Warring States (475-221 BCE) | Competing state systems, Legalism | Earliest bureaucratic experiments |
+| Qin Unification (221-206 BCE) | Centralized empire, standardization | Template for imperial governance |
+| Han Dynasty (206 BCE-220 CE) | Confucian-Legalist synthesis, civil service | "Confucianization" of the state |
+| Tang Dynasty (618-907) | Imperial examination system, cosmopolitan empire | Meritocratic bureaucracy matured |
+| Song Dynasty (960-1279) | Neo-Confucianism, commercial revolution | Civilian-military tension, reform debates |
+| Ming Dynasty (1368-1644) | Autocratic centralization, eunuch politics | Limits of centralization |
+| Qing Dynasty (1644-1912) | Multi-ethnic empire, late reform crisis | Confrontation with modernity |
+
+### Political Struggle in Late Imperial China
+
+```
+The Wang Anshi Reforms (1069-1076) -- Paradigmatic reform struggle:
+
+REFORMERS (New Policies faction):
+- Wang Anshi, chief architect
+- Goal: Strengthen the state against Jurchen/Liao military threat
+- Policies: State loans to farmers, militia system, merchant taxes,
+  reform of examination content
+
+CONSERVATIVES (Old Policies faction):
+- Sima Guang, Su Shi, Ouyang Xiu
+- Goal: Preserve Confucian moral governance, limit state intervention
+- Argument: State activism corrupts both officials and people
+
+DYNAMICS:
+1. Emperor Shenzong backs Wang Anshi (1069)
+2. Conservatives purged from court
+3. Policies implemented with mixed results
+4. Emperor dies (1085), conservatives recalled
+5. Reform faction returns (1094), purges conservatives
+6. Cycle of factional purges weakens Northern Song
+
+ANALYTICAL FRAMEWORK:
+- Not simply "progressive vs. conservative"
+- Two competing visions of state-society relations
+- Both grounded in Confucian political philosophy
+- Structural issue: factional competition without institutional checks
+```
+
+## European Political History: Key Periods
+
+### State Formation and Political Struggle
+
+| Period | Key Development | Significance |
+|--------|----------------|--------------|
+| Athenian democracy (5th c. BCE) | Direct democracy, citizen participation | Foundational political model |
+| Roman Republic/Empire | Republican institutions, imperial autocracy | Mixed constitution theory |
+| Feudalism (9th-15th c.) | Decentralized authority, vassal obligations | Fragmented sovereignty |
+| Magna Carta (1215) | Limited royal authority | Constitutional principle |
+| Protestant Reformation (16th c.) | Religious wars, cuius regio | Sovereignty and conscience |
+| English Civil War (1642-1651) | Parliamentary sovereignty | Constitutionalism vs. absolutism |
+| French Revolution (1789) | Popular sovereignty, rights of man | Democratic revolution template |
+| 1848 Revolutions | Liberal nationalism, class conflict | Limits of liberal revolution |
+| Welfare state (20th c.) | Social rights, managed capitalism | State-market-society bargain |
+
+### The French Revolution: Anatomy of Political Struggle
+
+```
+Phases of revolutionary escalation:
+
+1. FISCAL CRISIS (1787-1789)
+   - State bankruptcy from war debts
+   - Estates-General convened (first since 1614)
+   - Third Estate declares National Assembly
+
+2. LIBERAL REVOLUTION (1789-1791)
+   - Declaration of the Rights of Man
+   - Constitutional monarchy
+   - Abolition of feudal privileges
+
+3. RADICALIZATION (1792-1794)
+   - War with Austria and Prussia
+   - Republic declared, king executed
+   - Committee of Public Safety, Terror
+   - Factional struggle: Girondins vs. Jacobins vs. sans-culottes
+
+4. THERMIDORIAN REACTION (1794-1799)
+   - Fall of Robespierre
+   - Conservative republic (Directory)
+   - Military coup by Napoleon (1799)
+
+ANALYTICAL TAKEAWAYS:
+- Revolutions rarely achieve their initial goals
+- Radicalization driven by external war + internal factional competition
+- "Revolutionary devouring its children" pattern
+- Fiscal crisis as trigger, but ideology shapes trajectory
+```
+
+## Comparative Analysis
+
+### Divergence in State Formation
+
+```
+Why did China centralize early while Europe remained fragmented?
+
+CHINESE CENTRALIZATION:
+- Geographic: North China Plain enabled large-scale agriculture and armies
+- Ideological: Mandate of Heaven legitimized universal rule
+- Administrative: Examination system created loyalist bureaucracy
+- Economic: State monopolies (salt, iron) funded centralization
+
+EUROPEAN FRAGMENTATION:
+- Geographic: Mountains, seas, rivers created defensible boundaries
+- Ideological: Church vs. state dual authority
+- Administrative: Feudal loyalties vs. centralized bureaucracy
+- Economic: Commercial city-states resisted centralization
+
+COMPARATIVE INSIGHT:
+Neither path is "superior" -- each produced distinctive political capacities:
+- China: Administrative efficiency, cultural unity, but brittle to dynastic collapse
+- Europe: Innovation through competition, but chronic warfare and instability
+```
+
+### Comparative Methods
+
+| Method | Description | Example |
+|--------|-------------|---------|
+| Mill's Method of Difference | Same outcome, different conditions | Why revolution in France but not England? |
+| Mill's Method of Agreement | Different contexts, same outcome | Revolutions in France, Russia, China |
+| Process tracing | Causal mechanisms within a case | How fiscal crisis led to revolution |
+| Path dependence | Early choices constrain later options | Examination system locks in bureaucratic model |
+| Critical junctures | Moments of structural contingency | 1911: Qing collapse opens multiple paths |
+| Counterfactual analysis | "What if" reasoning | What if Wang Anshi reforms had succeeded? |
+
+### Comparative Political Concepts
+
+```
+Concepts that translate across traditions (with caution):
+
+LEGITIMACY
+- Chinese: Mandate of Heaven (tianming 天命) -- cosmic-moral authority
+- European: Social contract -- consent of the governed
+- Both: Performance-based (good governance sustains legitimacy)
+- Divergence: Hereditary vs. meritocratic principles
+
+BUREAUCRACY
+- Chinese: Scholar-officials selected by examination
+- European: Patrimonial officeholders → Weberian rational bureaucracy
+- Both: Tension between expertise and political loyalty
+- Key difference: China 1000+ years earlier
+
+POLITICAL OPPOSITION
+- Chinese: Remonstrance (jian 谏) -- loyal criticism within the system
+- European: Institutionalized opposition (parliament, parties)
+- Both: Risk of punishment for dissent
+- Key difference: Legitimate organized opposition vs. individual moral courage
+
+REVOLUTION
+- Chinese: Dynastic cycle (geming 革命 = change of mandate)
+- European: Progressive transformation (revolution as social rupture)
+- Both: Violence as mechanism of political change
+- Key difference: Cyclical vs. linear models of change
+```
+
+## Research Methods for Political History
+
+### Archival Sources for Political History
+
+```
+Chinese political history sources:
+- Veritable Records (shilu 实录): Official court records
+- Standard Histories (zhengshi 正史): 24 dynastic histories
+- Memorials (zouzhe 奏折): Official communications to the emperor
+- Local gazetteers (difangzhi 地方志): Provincial/county records
+- Private collections (wenji 文集): Literati writings and correspondence
+
+European political history sources:
+- Parliamentary records (Hansard, Archives parlementaires)
+- Diplomatic correspondence (state papers, foreign office files)
+- Police and intelligence reports
+- Pamphlets and political press
+- Personal papers of political actors
+- Constitutional and legal documents
+```
+
+## Writing Comparative Political History
+
+```
+Structure for a comparative article:
+
+1. INTRODUCTION: Present the comparison and why it matters
+2. THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK: State your analytical categories
+3. CASE 1: Detailed analysis (e.g., Chinese reform)
+4. CASE 2: Detailed analysis (e.g., European reform)
+5. COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS: Systematic comparison
+   - Similarities explained
+   - Differences explained
+   - Theoretical implications
+6. CONCLUSION: What does the comparison teach us?
+
+Common pitfalls:
+- Treating one case as the "norm" and the other as "deviant"
+- Superficial comparison (listing similarities without analysis)
+- Ignoring the internal diversity within each case
+- Anachronism: applying modern concepts to pre-modern societies
+```
+
+## Best Practices
+
+- **Learn the languages.** Serious comparative work requires reading sources in the original.
+- **Avoid teleology.** Do not explain the past as inevitably leading to the present.
+- **Historicize your categories.** "State," "class," "revolution" meant different things in different times and places.
+- **Engage with area studies scholarship.** Comparativists must respect the depth of specialist knowledge.
+- **Be explicit about your units of comparison.** What exactly is being compared, and at what level?
+- **Acknowledge asymmetries.** Chinese and European archives have different biases, gaps, and preservation histories.
+
+## References
+
+- Skocpol, T. (1979). States and Social Revolutions. Cambridge UP.
+- Tilly, C. (1992). Coercion, Capital, and European States. Wiley-Blackwell.
+- Zhao, D. (2015). The Confucian-Legalist State: A New Theory of Chinese History. Oxford UP.
+- Fukuyama, F. (2011). The Origins of Political Order. Farrar, Straus and Giroux.
+- [Cambridge History of China](https://www.cambridge.org/core/series/cambridge-history-of-china/) -- Standard reference

package/skills/domains/law/caselaw-access-api/SKILL.md

@@ -0,0 +1,149 @@
+---
+name: caselaw-access-api
+description: "Query 360+ years of US case law via the Harvard Caselaw Access Project"
+metadata:
+  openclaw:
+    emoji: "⚖️"
+    category: "domains"
+    subcategory: "law"
+    keywords: ["case law", "legal database", "court opinions", "Harvard law", "judicial data", "legal research"]
+    source: "https://case.law/"
+---
+
+# Caselaw Access Project API
+
+## Overview
+
+The Caselaw Access Project (CAP) by Harvard Law School provides free access to 6.9 million US court opinions spanning 360+ years. The REST API enables searching, filtering, and downloading full-text case opinions from all federal and state courts. No authentication required for metadata; API key (free registration) required for full text of post-1923 cases.
+
+## API Endpoints
+
+### Base URL
+
+```
+https://api.case.law/v1/
+```
+
+### Cases
+
+```bash
+# Search cases by keyword
+curl "https://api.case.law/v1/cases/?search=free+speech&decision_date_min=2020-01-01"
+
+# Get a specific case by ID
+curl "https://api.case.law/v1/cases/12345678/"
+
+# Filter by jurisdiction and court
+curl "https://api.case.law/v1/cases/?jurisdiction=us&court=us-sup-ct&search=miranda+rights"
+
+# Filter by date range
+curl "https://api.case.law/v1/cases/?decision_date_min=2015-01-01&decision_date_max=2025-12-31"
+
+# Get full text (requires API key for post-1923)
+curl -H "Authorization: Token YOUR_API_KEY" \
+  "https://api.case.law/v1/cases/12345678/?full_case=true"
+```
+
+### Query Parameters
+
+| Parameter | Description | Example |
+|-----------|-------------|---------|
+| `search` | Full-text search | `search=due+process` |
+| `jurisdiction` | Filter by jurisdiction slug | `jurisdiction=cal` (California) |
+| `court` | Filter by court slug | `court=us-sup-ct` |
+| `decision_date_min` | Earliest date | `decision_date_min=2020-01-01` |
+| `decision_date_max` | Latest date | `decision_date_max=2025-12-31` |
+| `cite` | Search by citation | `cite=410+U.S.+113` |
+| `name_abbreviation` | Case name | `name_abbreviation=Roe+v.+Wade` |
+| `ordering` | Sort results | `ordering=-decision_date` |
+| `page_size` | Results per page (max 100) | `page_size=50` |
+| `full_case` | Include full text | `full_case=true` |
+
+### Courts and Jurisdictions
+
+```bash
+# List all courts
+curl "https://api.case.law/v1/courts/"
+
+# List all jurisdictions
+curl "https://api.case.law/v1/jurisdictions/"
+
+# List all reporters (case report series)
+curl "https://api.case.law/v1/reporters/"
+```
+
+## Python Usage
+
+```python
+import requests
+
+BASE_URL = "https://api.case.law/v1"
+
+def search_cases(query: str, jurisdiction: str = None,
+                 court: str = None, max_results: int = 20) -> list:
+    """Search US case law."""
+    params = {"search": query, "page_size": min(max_results, 100)}
+    if jurisdiction:
+        params["jurisdiction"] = jurisdiction
+    if court:
+        params["court"] = court
+
+    resp = requests.get(f"{BASE_URL}/cases/", params=params)
+    resp.raise_for_status()
+    data = resp.json()
+
+    cases = []
+    for case in data.get("results", []):
+        cases.append({
+            "id": case["id"],
+            "name": case["name_abbreviation"],
+            "citation": case["citations"][0]["cite"] if case.get("citations") else None,
+            "court": case["court"]["name"],
+            "date": case["decision_date"],
+            "url": case["frontend_url"]
+        })
+    return cases
+
+# Search Supreme Court cases
+results = search_cases("fourth amendment", court="us-sup-ct")
+for case in results:
+    print(f"{case['citation']}: {case['name']} ({case['date']})")
+```
+
+## Bulk Data Access
+
+For large-scale research, download bulk datasets instead of querying the API:
+
+```bash
+# Bulk data available at:
+# https://case.law/bulk/download/
+# Formats: JSON (full case data) or text-only
+# Organized by jurisdiction and reporter
+```
+
+## Key Jurisdictions
+
+| Slug | Jurisdiction | Cases |
+|------|-------------|-------|
+| `us` | Federal (all) | ~1.5M |
+| `us-sup-ct` | US Supreme Court | ~65K |
+| `cal` | California | ~500K |
+| `ny` | New York | ~600K |
+| `tex` | Texas | ~300K |
+| `ill` | Illinois | ~250K |
+
+## Authentication
+
+```
+1. Register at https://case.law/user/register/
+2. Get API token from your account page
+3. Include in requests: Authorization: Token YOUR_TOKEN
+```
+
+Free accounts get full text for pre-1923 cases. Post-1923 full text requires an API token (still free).
+
+## References
+
+- [CAP API Documentation](https://case.law/api/)
+- [CAP Bulk Data](https://case.law/bulk/download/)
+- [Harvard Library Innovation Lab](https://lil.law.harvard.edu/)