Where it failed
“Invalid” tells you there is a problem. A useful answer tells you which half of the citation broke.
Criminal Code s. 265(5) is wrong. Knowing that is almost useless.
Checking Criminal Code, s. 265(5) returns:
statute_in_corpus: truegraph_match: falsecoverage_gap: falsevalidity_score: 0.1
The Act resolved. The pinpoint did not. Two halves of one citation, answered separately.
And it says so in one sentence: "Statute exists in the graph but the cited pinpoint does not."
A citation can break in two places. The law: you are citing the wrong Act. The place: right Act, wrong address inside it.
One means rethinking the argument. The other means checking a number.
"Invalid" collapses both into one word. The reader is told there is a problem and left to find it themselves, which is the work they were trying to hand over.
A failed lookup should say how far it got before it stopped.
MapleJuris reports the statute it resolved and, separately, the pinpoint it could not. Both facts survive into the answer, so the reader knows which half to go and check.
Every failure says where it happened. Send a citation with a section number you are not sure about. The response tells you which half held.
Free tier: 1,000 checks a month, no sales call.










